GNOME Blog on Canonical, GNOME, and KDE

[Sef]

I found it interesting reading this GNOME blog (http://blogs.gnome.org/bolsh/2011/03/11/lessons-learned/) about how Dave Neary sees the situation between Canonical, GNOME, and KDE.

Here is the main points condensed


For those without the patience to read this article (which is much longer than I intended it to be when I started!), here are the headline points:

FreeDesktop.org is broken as a standards body
Mark Shuttleworth doesn’t understand how GNOME works
GNOME is not easy to understand
Deep mistrust has developed between Canonical, GNOME & KDE
Difficult people are prominent in each of these projects
Behind closed doors conversations are poison
For people to work together, they need to be in the same place

[danbuter]

I think the whole situation is a mess.

I am kinda annoyed with Gnome, because they seem to be making changes (like removing min/max and maybe even close) just to make changes. Much of it seems unnecessary.

[chessnerd]

Canonical and GNOME especially have been butting heads as of late. The whole Unity vs. GNOME Shell thing is just short of becoming an outright war, and there can only be one "winner". Either most distros will move to GNOME 3, or most will go to Unity.

Anyway, the big names in FOSS development need to come together and work on these issues. It really is a shame that we have major companies and organizations fighting over standards and flinging mud at one another.


I think the whole situation is a mess.

I am kinda annoyed with Gnome, because they seem to be making changes (like removing min/max and maybe even close) just to make changes. Much of it seems unnecessary.

+1

I agree completely. The Gnome project now seems less concerned with providing a simple desktop environment that allows people to get work done and more concerned with trying to reinvent the wheel. I read the e-mail about the minimize and maximize buttons (http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-shell-list/2011-February/msg00192.html) and the last line really got to me:


The real form of feedback that we need going from GNOME 3.0 to 3.2 is careful observation of how users are using GNOME 3 - are they figuring out how to use the overview and workspaces and message tray as we expect them to use them, or are they doing cumbersome workarounds because we took away essential features.

- Owen

Figuring out how to use things? We're talking about a graphical user interface. The idea is to design something that is easy to use, not something that is going to force users to re-learn computing. If you are worried that users are going to create "cumbersome workarounds" for your interface, it probably means that you made a bad product.

[Sef]

For a different viewpoint (http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2011/03/collaborations-demise.html), collaboration 's demise: a view from Aaron Aseigo, a KDE hacker.

[mips]

For a different viewpoint (http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2011/03/collaborations-demise.html), collaboration 's demise: a view from Aaron Aseigo, a KDE hacker.

I have a lot of respect for this guy and his work.

[cascade9]

Canonical and GNOME especially have been butting heads as of late.

Yes, for sure-


He talks about a GNOME cabal, and GNOME’s strategy being “whatever Jon McCann wants to do with the panel”. Mark and others don’t understand why libappindicator was rejected as an external dependency, misunderstanding that external dependencies are, by definition, dependencies of GNOME modules.

snip!

Mark clearly believes that GNOME Shell is a Red Hat project.

http://blogs.gnome.org/bolsh/2011/03/11/lessons-learned/

This has been simmering below the surface for ages now, going back to at least libappindicators rejection. Its just more public now.


The whole Unity vs. GNOME Shell thing is just short of becoming an outright war, and there can only be one "winner". Either most distros will move to GNOME 3, or most will go to Unity.

i'd say it is an outright war now. There will be lots of 'winners'- Xfce, Lxde, Kde, the *boxes, even E16/E17.


Anyway, the big names in FOSS development need to come together and work on these issues. It really is a shame that we have major companies and organizations fighting over standards and flinging mud at one another.

How many people in 'FOSS' are going to embrace unity? What with the canonical contributor agreement and all that allows, I'd guess that the vast majority will go for gnome, if everything is equal, or even close to equal.....

[jwbrase]

Canonical and GNOME especially have been butting heads as of late. The whole Unity vs. GNOME Shell thing is just short of becoming an outright war, and there can only be one "winner". Either most distros will move to GNOME 3, or most will go to Unity.

Anyway, the big names in FOSS development need to come together and work on these issues. It really is a shame that we have major companies and organizations fighting over standards and flinging mud at one another.


It's even worse given that, in my mind, the two are closer to each other than they are to the kind of GUI I'm used to working with. Then again, I suppose there may be huge rifts on the "how do we implement this and was does the API look like" side that I'm unaware of as a user just operating off of first impressions.



Figuring out how to use things? We're talking about a graphical user interface. The idea is to design something that is easy to use, not something that is going to force users to re-learn computing. If you are worried that users are going to create "cumbersome workarounds" for your interface, it probably means that you made a bad product.

Well, I think what is being asked is "have we made a good product or a bad product? Are users adapting to the changes we made in a seamless fashion, or are they making cumbersome workarounds that would indicate we changed things too much?"

If 90% of the population loves it, then I can't really blame the designers for changing things, even if I'm in the 10% that will be finding a different GUI / sticking with GNOME 2.

I think here "Figuring out how to use things" means "adapting well to the changes" and "cumbersome workarounds" means "adapting poorly".

[Paqman]

Somebody asked on these forums the other day why the fact that Linux development is divided up into lots of projects could potentially be a bad thing. These kind of ridiculous, wasteful and counter-productive spats show exactly why.

I'm not saying that internal disputes don't occur in large unified organisations, just that they're more common in a decentralised ecosystem, and that there's no framework for resolving them. I think this is a real problem for FOSS.

[ikt]

For a different viewpoint (http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2011/03/collaborations-demise.html), collaboration 's demise: a view from Aaron Aseigo, a KDE hacker.

seems to sum up my feelings pretty well.

[gnomeuser]

GNOME are acting like offended babies, first they reject Ubuntu contributions repeatedly, then they whine when Ubuntu decides to go it's own way based on the response they got when following standard procedure.

I feel like Canonical made reasonable efforts to push their stuff through FreeDesktop.org in cooperation th KDE and others. FDO is defacto the closest thing we have to a standards body for the open desktop and we should leverage and strengthen it.

Also there seems to be a big problem with Canonical doing research and prototyping before submitting module suggestions. Coming with working code is now considered bad form in GNOME apparently. This is however no different from how e.g. Red Hat or any other Linux company works, though only Canonical gets blasted for it.

Due to a recent credit card change my Friend of GNOME membership ran out, this debate has re-enforced my belief that renewing it would be pointless.

I think Mark is right, if we want a standardized set of technologies, working tightly with FreeDesktop.org and KDE currently seems like the better path given conditions in the GNOME ecosystem.

[NightwishFan]

I feel like Canonical made reasonable efforts to push their stuff through FreeDesktop.org in cooperation th KDE and others. FDO is defacto the closest thing we have to a standards body for the open desktop and we should leverage and strengthen it.

I think Mark is right, if we want a standardized set of technologies, working tightly with FreeDesktop.org and KDE currently seems like the better path given conditions in the GNOME ecosystem.

I am glad KDE, Ubuntu and FD seem to be working together so well. I see a lot of good coming from it.


Also there seems to be a big problem with Canonical doing research and prototyping before submitting module suggestions. Coming with working code is now considered bad form in GNOME apparently. This is however no different from how e.g. Red Hat or any other Linux company works, though only Canonical gets blasted for it.
Someone on Aaron's blog made the comment "Canonical gets to be the whipping boy" and to be honest this sums up how I feel they are treated at times.

[NCLI]

Those interested need to read this blog post, and all of the comments (http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2011/03/collaborations-demise.html). SABDFL joins the discussion about halfway in.

[BigSilly]

Those interested need to read this blog post, and all of the comments (http://aseigo.blogspot.com/2011/03/collaborations-demise.html). SABDFL joins the discussion about halfway in.

Wow, interesting...and terrifying! :D

I don't follow a lot of the politics involved in free software, but a lot of the discussion leaves me concerned. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that the crux of the argument is really generally centred around the complications of free software being Free, and free software being a business. Though I expect that simplifies things too much, it seems to be some of the problem.

[WinterMadness]

just make KDE the default desktop in ubuntu :)

[NCLI]

Wow, interesting...and terrifying! :D

I don't follow a lot of the politics involved in free software, but a lot of the discussion leaves me concerned. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that the crux of the argument is really generally centred around the complications of free software being Free, and free software being a business. Though I expect that simplifies things too much, it seems to be some of the problem.

No, it centers around GNOME not being very cooperative on standards.

[weasel fierce]

Interesting stuff to read.

[andymorton]

just make kde the default desktop in ubuntu :)

yes!!! :d

[Sef]

Here is Steven Vaughan-Nichols take on Ubuntu and GNOME's dispute (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/ubuntu-linux-and-gnome-the-disputes-continue/8469?tag=mantle_skin;content).

[legolas_w]

Actually gnome is not doing well compared to KDE in term of brining new features on the table. I guess we should see more problem with Gnome as KDE is consolidating its position and further providing new features and enhancements.

It is not a wild imagination if one says that KDE will replace Gnome if Gnome goes their own way... I like Gnome as it is pretty light and stable but I never tried KDE 4 releases. I guess its time to try Kubuntu for the next release.

[oldos2er]

just make KDE the default desktop in ubuntu :)

NO! No, we don't want them to start "improving" KDE....

[Merk42]

NO! No, we don't want them to start "improving" KDE....
Unity runs on Compiz (which runs on KDE)
Unity-2D is built on Qt...

[NightwishFan]

I have no problem with Canonical working with KDE.

[AllRadioisDead]

Unity runs on Compiz (which runs on KDE)
Unity-2D is built on Qt...

I believe he was referring to the recent 'improvements' made to gnome.

[ErikNJ]

I'd like to see this nonsense being flung back and forth come to an end. Ultimately, unity is a divergence from Gnome Shell - big deal. How that divergence occurred doesn't matter anymore outside of a clear lack of proper communication (communication is the root of this debacle now anyway).

Ultimately, focus should be turned back towards bug number 1 on launchpad. (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1) This needs the continued focus of all of FLOSS without all the unproductive finger pointing (finding the "root cause" does not need to turn into a he said/she said thing like this).

[BigCityCat]

I'd like to see this nonsense being flung back and forth come to an end. Ultimately, unity is a divergence from Gnome Shell - big deal. How that divergence occurred doesn't matter anymore outside of a clear lack of proper communication (communication is the root of this debacle now anyway).

Ultimately, focus should be turned back towards bug number 1 on launchpad. (https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1) This needs the continued focus of all of FLOSS without all the unproductive finger pointing (finding the "root cause" does not need to turn into a he said/she said thing like this).

Stop being so reasonable. Just remember this is all gnomes fault.

[Merk42]

I believe he was referring to the recent 'improvements' made to gnome.
And I was showing how it's possible that Kubuntu may just use Unity for its UI.

[NCLI]

NO! No, we don't want them to start "improving" KDE....

Why not? Even if you don't like the changes, you can always install vanilla KDE.

[oobuntoo]

Fights between GNOME and Canonical+KDE continues.

http://www.osnews.com/story/24520/GNOME_Canonical_Spat_Continues

http://www.osnews.com/story/24510/Shuttleworth_Seigo_GNOME_s_Not_Collaborating

My impression I get from reading all these is that GNOME people are difficult to work with. I'm glad I don't support them by using their desktop.

[bruce89]

GNOME are acting like offended babies, first they reject Ubuntu contributions repeatedly, then they whine when Ubuntu decides to go it's own way based on the response they got when following standard procedure.

This ignores the fact that Ubuntu contributions were never actually proposed until they were "finished", and now the issue of copyright assignment.


Unity runs on Compiz (which runs on KDE)
Unity-2D is built on Qt...

Compiz is not a KDE project.


NO! No, we don't want them to start "improving" KDE....

It looks like this may happen.

The whole thing is a deliberate misrepresentation of GNOME to make them look bad. Perhaps it's designed to bolster support for more forking/improvements like Unity.

[wojox]

Compiz is not a KDE project.


It's not Gnome either. Compiz is it's own entity.

[NightwishFan]

The whole thing is a deliberate misrepresentation of GNOME to make them look bad. Perhaps it's designed to bolster support for more forking/improvements like Unity.

I doubt that. I do not see some of the folks that work at Canonical staying if they have intentions like that.

[DeadSuperHero]

Figured I'd pitch in my two cents (http://deadsuperhero.com/blog/2011/03/17/could-the-canonical-vs-gnome-debacle-be-good-for-the-free-desktop/). Really, focusing on the positives here: at the very least, both sides (Canonical and Gnome) have developed their own polished products that can compete side-by-side. Really, it's actually kind of an exciting time to be an end user when you think about it.

[jerenept]

Figured I'd pitch in my two cents (http://deadsuperhero.com/blog/2011/03/17/could-the-canonical-vs-gnome-debacle-be-good-for-the-free-desktop/). Really, focusing on the positives here: at the very least, both sides (Canonical and Gnome) have developed their own polished products that can compete side-by-side. Really, it's actually kind of an exciting time to be an end user when you think about it.

Especially if someone manages to force through some standards that will make life on a Linux desktop easier. (and I think that Canonical is in an excellent position to do this)

[GabrielYYZ]

NO! No, we don't want them to start "improving" KDE....

+1

if KDE gets "unityzed" i'll stick to XFCE, if XFCE follows suit i'll move to enlightenment, if enlightenment folds to the "unity paradigm", i'll protect myself with some *box and, if all else fails, i'll hopefully would've learned enough by then to write my own desktop enviroment that doesn't try to "revolutionize" my desktop "experience" and just let me use my computer in peace like Babbage intended[1]...

1: Charles Babbage is considered "father of the computer" for those that might not get the reference.

[Merk42]

+1

if KDE gets "unityzed" i'll stick to XFCE, if XFCE follows suit i'll move to enlightenment, if enlightenment folds to the "unity paradigm", i'll protect myself with some *box and, if all else fails, i'll hopefully would've learned enough by then to write my own desktop enviroment that doesn't try to "revolutionize" my desktop "experience" and just let me use my computer in peace like Babbage intended[1]...

1: Charles Babbage is considered "father of the computer" for those that might not get the reference.
Or if it's like GNOME you could just disable it and use the default UI of the DE...

[mkendall]

+1

if KDE gets "unityzed" i'll stick to XFCE, if XFCE follows suit i'll move to enlightenment, if enlightenment folds to the "unity paradigm", i'll protect myself with some *box and, if all else fails, i'll hopefully would've learned enough by then to write my own desktop enviroment that doesn't try to "revolutionize" my desktop "experience" and just let me use my computer in peace like Babbage intended[1]...

1: Charles Babbage is considered "father of the computer" for those that might not get the reference.

And will you write it in Ada?[2]

2: Ada is a programming language named after Ada Lovelace (1815–1852) who is often credited as being the first computer programmer based on her writings about Babbage's differential engine.