funpidgin - pidgin fork!

[loell]

http://funpidgin.sourceforge.net/


What makes us different from the official client, is that we work for you. Unlike the Pidgin developers, we believe the user should have the final say in what goes into the program.

well, how about that? :biggrin:

**additional features**


* Every feature Pidgin has... plus:
* "Entry area manual sizing" a plugin by Artemy Kapitula that allows manual resizing of the entry area.
* An option to set the size of the buddy icons displayed in the chat window.
* An option to let the window manager place new windows.
* Two different ways of seeing that your buddies are typing.
* An optional send button for Tablet PC users.

[TreeFinger]

how about web cam support?

[loell]

given the more resource/talent the official client have, and yet no webcam support. i think they couldn't implement it either.

[Polygon]

i somehow knew this would come along as the result of pidgin's hard-headedness about stupid stuff, like not being able to resize the entry field...i mean..come on.

anyone have any screenshots? Is the only thing that changes the icons and the specified features basically?

[mrgnash]

The thing about the Pidgin developers is that they always do the right thing, no matter how much people whinge. They stick close to the Gnome philosophy in that way, and I say good on them.

[jrusso2]

i somehow knew this would come along as the result of pidgin's hard-headedness about stupid stuff, like not being able to resize the entry field...i mean..come on.

anyone have any screenshots? Is the only thing that changes the icons and the specified features basically?

I had a friend that submitted a fix so you could resize and they turned it down.

[Polygon]

The thing i dissagree about is the resizing of the entry window. Why would you take that away? What happens if i have to post a page of my essay im writing and i have to change a few words or something? I have to deal with the scroll bar instead of just maximizing the window and making the entry window a lot bigger.

I can understand making pidgin simple, like their idea that you dont need to see what protocol your buddy list entries are using at first glance, but stuff like this is kinda crossing the line between simplicity and usability. I mean.....if resizing something is not simple, then how come we are are allowed to resize the main pidgin window? how come we are able to resize ANY window? It just doesn't make sense to me.

[misfitpierce]

Think I prob just stick to regular Pidgin... Might try it out and bored enough to install 32 bit pidgin on my 64 bit 8.04 install :) lol

[atomkarinca]

Well, it only adds a tab to the preferences, I have attached an image.

[muriloq]

Kudos to funpidgin. If I needed arrogant developers telling me what's better for me based on the experience of stupid users and noobs I would be using Mac OS X... >:-)

[SuperSon!c]

Kudos to funpidgin. If I needed arrogant developers telling me what's better for me based on the experience of stupid users and noobs I would be using Mac OS X... >:-)

elitist much?

[madjr]

the normal pidgin got kind of bashed here:

http://contentconsumer.wordpress.com/2008/04/27/is-ubuntu-useable-enough-for-my-girlfriend/

is really takes a while to get used to, is hardly intuitive...

i hope fun pidgin could fix those issues and make it easier.

an easierpidgin is what we need.

[loell]

yeah, you could say

"pun the pidgin" ;)

forks and alternatives have been doing this for a long time, they name their projects to convey a statement directed to their project predecessors.

[Mateo]

The thing about the Pidgin developers is that they always do the right thing, no matter how much people whinge. They stick close to the Gnome philosophy in that way, and I say good on them.

Not as much as the Evolution developers. The Evolution developers won't even make a tray icon because they say the notification area is not meant for trays. So they won't make one.

[loell]

isn't that possible through evolution plugin framework?

[23meg]

isn't that possible through evolution plugin framework?

Who cares, right? Just fork the damn thing for choosing not to betray its own principles, implement your pet feature, end up with a couple thousand users and zero contributors, and die out of lack of reason to exist.

Or just choose the path of reason: learn (http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue3_10/raymond/) how FOSS development works and how to get along (socially and technically) with people and projects you disagree with.

[loell]

in evolution context if it can be done through a plugin, then the developers could care less, let plugin writer do it.

[Polygon]

Well i just discovered that pidgins input window resizes automatically to the amount of text you put in....so yeah i guess this is fine.

[GavinZac]

Kudos to funpidgin. If I needed arrogant developers telling me what's better for me based on the experience of stupid users and noobs I would be using Mac OS X... >:-)

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you: Irony!

[bikeboy]

Sigh. What a waste of effort.

I'll be sticking with "plain" old Pidgin, its developers put it best...many times. http://planet.pidgin.im/

[deadowl]

Actually, I think that removing the ability to resize the input box and just auto-resizing it was a good idea.

[vishzilla]

If I have to see beyond Pidgin for the GNOME environment, Empathy comes to my mind. It has all the making of a good IM client for Linux. Its still in early development and GNOME devs plan to include the latest version in 2.24

[firefeather]

http://funpidgin.sourceforge.net/

well, how about that? :biggrin:

**additional features**

I'm not one who knows much about why people fork a project in the first place, but I don't see why that wouldn't work in a Pidgin plugin. It seems like forks a waste of resources when the original project is reasonably modifiable through plugins.

And it doesn't even sound very fun to me.

[loell]

if you know how pidgin plugin framework works, then you'd know that window resizing isn't one of them. having said that while they say its a full-blown fork, at this stage of their development i think it is still a modification/hack.

[yatt]

I've tended to use more MSN centeric IMs instead of Pidgin. I only use MSN, so it is somewhat pointless to use a full blown multi-protocol client such as Pidgin, when something MSN centric would support MSN better.

Currently, my client is Emesene. I like how I can spam my friends with several dozen nudges in a second, while they can only send around one per minute in return.

[barbedsaber]

for those of you that need webcam support, try


sudo apt-get install kopete

it is a seperate IM client to pidgen, and (IMO) it is buggier, slower and dosn't seem to like google talk, BUT it has webcam support


oh, and If you get an error about some jasper related thing, well, I cant give you the exact thing you need to get, because I have update manager running atm, so I cant open synaptics, but its somthing like libjasper.

[Hells_Dark]

Well i just discovered that pidgins input window resizes automatically to the amount of text you put in....so yeah i guess this is fine.

I didn't notice it. I like :)

[SuperSon!c]

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you: Irony!

lol

[Half-Left]

How about proper msn support instead of forking it for a few silly reasons and giving it a childish name.

[lingnoi]

There's a very interesting debate (http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/4986#comment:272) going on over at pidgin and a professor chimed this tidbit in.


Well, let me first thank everyone for contributing their feedback to this tracking ticket.

I teach "Collaboration in an Open Source World" at a local college. I have been searching for, and in this ticket have found, a perfect example where communication between open source developers and users fails at multiple, fundamental levels.

Obviously, the motivations of open source developers are varied; some do it for technical enjoyment, others enjoy knowing they are contributing intellectual capital to a better world. The problem is when the motivations of open source developers conflict with the expectations of users.

Consider every wildly successful open source project: the users are enthralled with their ability to perform new activities in ways previously unimagined. Rabid dedication grows, and an evangelical fan base results. Pretty soon, it's obvious why users would not want to go with non-open source software alternatives.

What happens when those same newfound powers are taken away? What happens when the developers impose their personal dogmas upon the project? Even for as small an issue as chat window resizing, a minority (or majority) of users will emphatically express dissent.

It's easy to see why open source developers could develop dogmas. Some like to fantasize about the theoretical limits to which a design may become "pure", developing a vile repulsion to anything which steers away from purity. Others become obsessed with metrics such as maintenance effort per line of code, even though they often worry about features and lines of code which only contribute to 1% of the complexity of the application. Yet others develop fixation on "ultimate user simplicity", feeling that two options are better than five options which deliver more power. The most dangerous dogma is the one exhibited here: the God feature. "One technological solution can meet every possible user-desired variation of a feature."

The initial lure of open source software is that quality software should resoundingly meet the needs of users. As demonstrated up until Pidgin 2.4, the fan base has emphatically been extolling the virtues of Pidgin. But when developers take a feature away, presumably to implement a "better version", and that better version in fact is a step backwards from the functionality previously available, they had better have a damn good reason. Such a reason is lacking here.

"This is how IM should be used." "Our design is better." "We will only consider a 'pure' design in which we can accomplish the old functionality in a paradigm that also supports the new functionality." "An additional checkbox is too detrimental to the user interface." "Maintaining two branches of logic within the dialog sizing component will be untenable." "We have no interest in not pushing our shiny new object."

These are all statements, which if executed within a corporate arena, would get developers fired. Developers, make note: you are doing a disservice to the community you claim to represent, and are doing so with false illusions that you are "right" because you have convictions in your justifications.

It does not matter that you are open source developers with the autonomy to ignore your user base. It does not matter that a plugin "could" be developed to solve the problem. It does not matter that you feel your default solution is superior. It does not matter that you only want to consider solutions which can be implemented through the new solution framework. It does not matter that your users should abandon your product if they don't like it. It does not matter that someone could fork the code base. It does not matter if 11 thousand people download your source code per day, and only 270 complain about it. For each of these, there are very valid rebuttals.

So, only 270 complaints for this feature, out of 11 thousand downloads? How many people immediately uninstalled the program when they realized it could not longer do the simplest functionality that GAIM and other IM agents do? How many don't know that they are using software that is now crippled in comparison to its former flexibility? How many use the software today, but will switch to GAIM tomorrow when they hear from their friends that it's so much easier to resize in GAIM?

The fact is that typing letters into an IM window is THE most critical task of an IM program. Users have varying needs, needs which can not be addressed by your limited attempts to come up with "one solution for everything" that incorporates "shiny new logic" that demonstrates how smart you are. You are ignoring the fan base with a dedication to your convictions that is alarmingly evident to even the most unobservant of followers, and as such, you are demonstrating that you no longer deserve to be in the position of servicing the needs of your user base.

For the sake of everyone involved, I hope you find your path back to the light.

Do we really want software that is included in the default install of Ubuntu where users aren't listened to? In my opinion I believe instant messaging is very important to people and Ubuntu needs something that can do voice and video anyway. Is it time for a change?

Edit: Link.. http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/4986
Edit Edit: I found out that a group has forked pidgin (http://funpidgin.sourceforge.net/) over this issue.
Edit edit edit: I changed the text because I got some of it wrong.

[dasunst3r]

Can you please link us to where you obtained this letter?

I think that this letter was meant to assert that it's impossible to please everybody, but some will definitely get the impression that these developers are being snobbish.

[itix]

Haha, yeah!
That is the attitude I would like to see on all official notices, evem though I like Emesene much better than pidgin.

All Open source projects start because someone is missing something.

[Saint Angeles]

well they're right.

i mean, if you don't like it, don't use it... just like ubuntu.

[raul_]

Kinda reminds me of Gnome :)

[SuperSon!c]

link please.

[TeraDyne]

Oddly enough, Daisuke_Ido and I were just talking about this on #kubuntu-offtopic a few minutes ago. That attitude is the reason I switched back to Kopete.

I wouldn't mind seeing Pidgin ripped from Ubuntu in favor of something else. However, I'd like the link for that letter. If it's legit, I'd like to put it up on my livejournal, and maybe a couple of the LJ communities.

[MyR]

I agree with the Pidgin devs. They write software for fun and shouldn't be bossed around by those they share it with.

[lingnoi]

Can you please link us to where you obtained this letter?

Yeah, sorry I completely forgot to include it.

http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/4986

In reply to Saint: That's my point, that Ubuntu doesn't use it and replace it with something else. My suggestion being something that includes Voice / Video support since that is what Ubuntu users would want in a default IM client in my opinion.

[Npl]

Might aswell search for an alternative to the Linux-Kernel, as they dont agree on adding every brainfart either (http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/docs/lkml/#s15-6)

[John T. Monkey]

sounds fair enough... but i don't think ubuntu should switch it. what counts is the program itself, not a comment one of the developers made on a bad day, and it is the best im i've ever used (out of msn, aim, icq, trillian, amsn and kopete, if i remember rightly)

[Moop]

The fork. http://funpidgin.sourceforge.net/

[Sierra-X]

If you're going to quote the post from the bug page, quote the whole thing (bolded what stood out for me):


Kluvik,

You make an excellent point. From now on, the user base of Pidgin should just assume that the following fictitious letter was ghost written for the Pidgin development team:

"Dear Users:

You are most undoubtedly reading this page because you want to know how to manually resize the text input area in Pidgin. It is a feature that you have perhaps grown accustomed to and comfortable with, but please make note - this feature is no longer supported.

We have received many complaints from a very small minority of the user base who nonetheless persists in being very vocal about their displeasure. Please take comfort in the fact that they are only a very small percentage base of Pidgin users, and if ignored, will go away and bother some other open source project.

Nonetheless, we feel it very important to make the following proclamation regarding on our stance on this project: we will not "fix" it. In fact, please notice that the status of this "bug" is "wontfix". So would you please just get this idea through you head and go away now?

We are developers of this software, and we develop Pidgin so that it may fulfill our explicit needs and desires. If you want to join us for the ride, then fine. Just shut up, though. Please, if we've made a feature a certain way, it's because WE WANT IT THAT WAY. Is that so hard to understand? All day long our bosses tell us what to do. Our wives tell us what to do. Our government tell us what to do. YOU will NOT tell us what to do.

Some say that as the developers of the premier open source IM client, we have a "responsibility" to serve as wardens of our precious charge, nurturing it into a fine, outstanding, model citizen of the open source community. That's rubbish. The last time we checked, we didn't sign up for day care. We signed up to write software that WE want to use.

So please take your ideas and go elsewhere. If you want a development team that responds to the desires of their user base, hoping to release world-class, quality software to millions of people, then start your own open source project. It's not that hard. It's free. All you have to do is commit your time, just like we commit ours.

The development team would very much like to come up with a solution that meets the needs of ourselves and the general user base. However, we cannot understand your needs. You speak in a foreign gibberish, gobbledy gook language that none can understand. "I just like it that way!" That is not an answer! You must enumerate the metrics and aspects of your preferences and desires in ways that we can evaluate and then assimilate into our collective. We cannot currently assimilate any of your idiotic reasons for wanting a resizable text box. And by idiotic, we mean "any solution which does not fit into the scheme of our cleverly intelligent auto-resizing text field."

So, just to make it clear: we will not listen to your suggestions unless your suggestions make sense to us, and we like them. If you do not like it, there are plenty of other ways on the Internet in which you may occupy your time.

Regards, Pidgin development team"

http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/4986#comment:287

[sstusick]

The developers of Pidgin are morons as far as I am concerned. They've ruined GAIM after they made it Pidgin, now it seems they don't give a ***** what the users want. Why bother programming software if you're not going to listen to the users? The last time I consulted them with a problem with their software they said "Well it works for us." Real nice.

I'd happily use something else, but Kopete stinks, and that's the only other option there is. At least, that I can find. If anyone has a decent alternative, please let me know.

[lingnoi]

If you're going to quote the post from the bug page, quote the whole thing (bolded what stood out for me):

Ah! You are right! I didn't see that part, I can't believe I missed that.. I'll update the post.

[akiratheoni]

Well, they are here to serve us but if it's just a minority of users then it's probably better for them to let them go and fork their own project.

Have you guys read this article?

http://positivesharing.com/2008/03/top-5-reasons-why-the-customer-is-always-right-is-wrong/

This is exactly what they're doing. Having users pester them for that little feature is just going to make things worse for the developer, especially when they're so hellbent on not changing that feature. It'll be easier to let them go rather than to be the user's bitch, if you excuse my language. I realize that the developers are there to serve the users, but not when it stresses out developers.

[Sierra-X]

Having users pester them for that little feature is just going to make things worse for the developer, especially when they're so hellbent on not changing that feature. It'll be easier to let them go rather than to be the user's bitch, if you excuse my language. I realize that the developers are there to serve the users, but not when it stresses out developers.
However, you have to take into account that the feature the devs are being pestered for isn't something new, it's a regression. It's existed all along, and NOW they decide "meh, we don't like that, screw what anyone else may think." That's a pretty big difference to me.

[lingnoi]

This is exactly what they're doing. Having users pester them for that little feature is just going to make things worse for the developer Not in Pidgin or Gaims case. What they've been constantly doing is taking stuff out and users are asking to make the features taken out optional. The developers aren't even willing to do this and it's their way or the highway.

[seanc7]

They probably put that up because they were getting a ridiculous number of "add this little MSN or Yahoo messenger or AIM or whatever feature that only a small hand full of people actually d use", but we want it and we're going to be rude and obnoxious in our demands for it.

[raul_]

I honestly think it's not a minority, it's just a minority that bothers to contact them. I also went "WTF??" when I tried to resize the text input area, and the thing wouldn't move, but I didn't sent a mail complaining.

Meh, I'm using KDE now

I also think it's a big difference in not adding features and arbitrarily removing them (seriously, resizing a f-ing box is that hard that they had to remove it??)

[23meg]

now it seems they don't give a ***** what the users want. Why bother programming software if you're not going to listen to the users?

Listening to users != doing everthing users want

They've posted long responses in that bug report, dealt with lots of people complaining on IRC, and wrote a few blog posts. That means they listened. Listening means being ready to hear what the other party has to say; not necessarily having to comply with it. They've heard what users had to say, and didn't agree. Users who disagreed were free to maintain their own branches, implement the functionality via a plugin, or fork. And they did fork.

The popular assumption here is that "the users" is a set with homogenous demands and preferences which are never in conflict. That's simply wrong: if as a user I like this new feature, and it's reverted, do I get the right to complain that "Pidgin developers don't listen to users" because they didn't go about things the way I and some others wanted?


What they've been constantly doing is taking stuff out

What else have they taken out?


and users are asking to make the features taken out optional.

When things are optional, those who don't want them can just disable them, and they won't be affected at all, and everyone will be happy, and it will be a win-win situation, right?

Wrong (http://ometer.com/features.html).

[mbarclay@gmail.com]

I couldn't get the Funpidgin deb to install and I'm not thrilled with installing another plugin with another checkbox, so here's what I did to get a resizable chat window back. I am running Ubuntu Hardy 8.04 / Pidgin 2.4.1.



sudo apt-get install pidgin-dev

apt-get source pidgin

cp [attached gtkconv.c] pidgin-2.4.1/pidgin/gtkconv.c

cd pidgin-2.4.1

./configure

make

sudo make install [ Installs to /usr/local/bin ]

apt-get remove pidgin [ Optional, although the Ubuntu pidgin will
still be in your PATH ]


The Applications Menu -> Internet should still show Pidgin.

[SuperSon!c]

just because of this thread, not only am i going to strictly use pidgin (i use digsby on my windows box), but i'm going to recommend it to everyone on my contact lists.

[bikeboy]

FFS, it auto-resizes when needed!!! Read planet.pidgin.im and realise why these devs are right and have been on numerous occasions like this. Then...stop being whining little children.

[sstusick]

It auto-resizes yes, but you can't manually resize it to read the ENTIRE post WITHOUT scrolling. What they did was UNACCEPTABLE. Adding features is fine, but taking away features that have existed since the beginning? There is NO excuse for this.

[banjobacon]

How is a resizable text box better than the auto-resizing text box? Or is it that some people are just afraid of change?

[lingnoi]

When things are optional, those who don't want them can just disable them, and they won't be affected at all, and everyone will be happy, and it will be a win-win situation, right?

Wrong (http://ometer.com/features.html). Again, this has been said many times in the thread, they're not requesting to add features which is what your link is about, this is about keeping features that already work in Pidgin.

At some point Ubuntu users are going to want voice, video, their stupid icons, etc. Pidgin developers will never provide this so why should it be default in Ubuntu?

[Foster Grant]

I agree with the Pidgin devs. They write software for fun and shouldn't be bossed around by those they share it with.

Anybody who believes this should be barred from writing software for anybody other than themselves, especially open-source software.

Fortunately, it is open-source software. Project is forked here (http://sourceforge.net/projects/funpidgin) (alternate site there (http://funpidgin.sourceforge.net/)) at least until the crybabies on the Pidgin dev team get over themselves (see also: Compiz-Beryl). It's entirely possible that won't happen (see also: Galeon-Epiphany).

More details on the reason for the fork (shorter and more palatable than the long quote in the originating post) can be found here (http://weblog.leapster.org/index.php?/archives/92-Pidgin-dumb-user-interface-changes.html) and here (http://weblog.leapster.org/index.php?/archives/98-Pidgin-working-around-the-developers.html).

Given the Pidgin dev team's past history of UI errors, removal of popular features, &c., Funpidgin might end up winning the fight. And Funpidgin already has some useful features added in that the Pidgin keepers apparently turned away.

[23meg]

Again, this has been said many times in the thread, they're not requesting to add features which is what your link is about, this is about keeping features that already work in Pidgin.

Keeping an existing functionality optional while introducing another which overlaps it means twice the maintenance load.


At some point Ubuntu users are going to want voice, video, their stupid icons, etc. Pidgin developers will never provide this

Are you sure (http://www.adiumx.com/blog/2007/10/happy-leopard-day.php)?

[mbarclay@gmail.com]

I use IM mostly to send code snippets to co-workers. When sending large, multi-line messages, its much less distracting to start with a huge text area, rather than have it expand itself automatically. Also, the text stays stationary while editing the message, instead of dancing all of the place as box resizes itself in response to the message.

[Foster Grant]

Keeping an existing functionality optional while introducing another which overlaps it means twice the maintenance load.


This is true if and only if another feature is introduced overlapping the old feature.

[lingnoi]

Are you sure (http://www.adiumx.com/blog/2007/10/happy-leopard-day.php)? Wow Adium looks like it's making real progress over Pidgin. Too bad it's Mac only.

Yeah I'm pretty sure. The Pidgin devs have been promising this for years, it'll never be implemented. Of course you're happy to wait and see what scraps they throw off the table at you, but I think I'll be using FunPidgin (http://funpidgin.sourceforge.net/) which already offers an instantly better feature set for me personally and I have high hopes for the future too.

[23meg]

Wow Adium looks like it's making real progress over Pidgin. Too bad it's Mac only.

It uses the same core library that Pidgin does, libpurple, and work is going into adding video and voice support to that.


Yeah I'm pretty sure. The Pidgin devs have been promising this for years, it'll never be implemented.

Has anyone else been able to do it in those years? No. So perhaps there is a reason: it must be difficult to do voice and video over undocumented protocols.


Of course you're happy to wait and see what scraps they throw off the table at you, but I think I'll be using FunPidgin which already offers an instantly better feature set for me personally and I have high hopes for the future too.

Use whatever you like. Just quit the mudslinging.

[SuperSon!c]

It auto-resizes yes, but you can't manually resize it to read the ENTIRE post WITHOUT scrolling. What they did was UNACCEPTABLE. Adding features is fine, but taking away features that have existed since the beginning? There is NO excuse for this.

lol "unacceptable"

[23meg]

This is true if and only if another feature is introduced overlapping the old feature.

And that is the case here: an auto-resizing input box is a feature that overlaps another feature: a manual-resizing one. They provide the same core functionality, but do it in different ways: provide an area for the user to enter text.

[23meg]

Anybody who believes this should be barred from writing software for anybody other than themselves, especially open-source software.

You are not entitled to bar anyone from writing free and open source software. Nobody is. That would be suppressing the very freedoms defined by the GPL and the open source definition.

[lingnoi]

Has anyone else been able to do it in those years? Yes! That was my point, the code was done and has been on sourceforge for years!

[23meg]

Yes! That was my point, the code was done and has been on sourceforge for years!

Why aren't you using it then?

Perhaps it wasn't "done" to the point of being ready to integrate? Perhaps there are technical problems preventing it from being integrated? How can you assume it's a social problem rather than a technical one, without looking at the code?

[Foster Grant]

And that is the case here: an auto-resizing input box is a feature that overlaps another feature: a manual-resizing one. They provide the same core functionality, but do it in different ways: provide an area for the user to enter text.

Windows that resize themselves on their own without user input ... that's a bug, not a feature.

[23meg]

Windows that resize themselves on their own without user input ... that's a bug, not a feature.

Without user input?

[lingnoi]

Perhaps it wasn't "done" to the point of being ready to integrate? Perhaps there are technical problems preventing it from being integrated? How can you assume it's a social problem rather than a technical one, without looking at the code? How can you assume it's not when I clearly know more about it then you do right now? Even when the evidence is forced into your face you're still waving your flag, go ahead, I'm done with you.

[sstusick]

FunPidgin is nice, the way Pidgin should be!

[SuperSon!c]

hey here's an idea. don't use it.

[Foster Grant]

Without user input?

Without asking user permission to resize the window. This is wrong.

It is also wrong to take away the user's option to set the text-entry window at whatever height he or she uses.

[23meg]

How can you assume it's not

I'm not assuming the opposite; I'm questioning the validity of your assumption.


when I clearly know more about it then you do right now?

You haven't illustrated that you know more about it than me, so I'm not supposed to know that you do.


Even when the evidence is forced into your face

You haven't provided any evidence that backs your claims.

[sstusick]

Without asking user permission to resize the window. This is wrong.

It is also wrong to take away the user's option to set the text-entry window at whatever height he or she uses.

=D>

[lingnoi]

You haven't provided any evidence that backs your claims. Do your own research and prove me wrong.

[23meg]

Without asking user permission to resize the window. This is wrong.

Typing or pasting text is user input.

[23meg]

Do your own research and prove me wrong.

You aren't exactly the kind of debater that inspires me to do that, to put it mildly, so I feel reluctant to.

[bikeboy]

hey here's an idea. don't use it.

But, but...Then I don't get to complain that the software I helped develop and paid for...Oh, hang on a sec. Well, it still doesn't work exactly as I want it to, so those evil developers had better fix it for me or else! Especially since they can't justify any of the decisions about their software...

...http://www.schierer.org/~luke/log/20070710-1129/on-forks-and-forking
http://www.pidgin.im/~seanegan/cgi-bin/pyblosxom.cgi/identity.html
http://www.pidgin.im/~seanegan/cgi-bin/pyblosxom.cgi/momentum.html
http://pidgin.im/~elb/cgi-bin/pyblosxom.cgi/giving_back.html

The use of 'vocal minorities' in some of those posts is so apt.

[ODF]

Holy batman, if you prononce emesene in french it's like saying M/S/N in french.

They must be french.

[lingnoi]

hey here's an idea. don't use it. That's kinda my point, maybe it's time to switch Pidgin from the default installed instant messaging app.

[RiceMonster]

I find it amusing that people get so worked up about a text input box. Give me a break. Pidgin is pretty nice, I like it better than amsn and kopete by far, but I like emesene the most, so that's what I use. If I used protocols other than msn as well, I'd be using Pidgin.

[bikeboy]

That's kinda my point, maybe it's time to switch Pidgin from the default installed instant messaging app.

Ask yourself this. When it comes to default applications, upstream support is one of the factors to be considered. Which do you think will better supported upstream in 12 months?

So for people who actually care about every little feature being an option, surely installing another app isn't a big deal. For those who just want something that is straightforward and works, Pidgin is a sensible default.

Maybe KDE is more your style - not that there's anything wrong with that, just a different philosophy. Pidgin fits Gnome rather nicely.

Lastly, the Ubuntu devs and those who attend the summits tend to be rather less hot-headed than those who complain about feature decisions on someone's bug tracker or in a forum. Thus, switching from Pidgin as default won't happen anytime soon (except maybe to provide better Gnome integration), because each idea is fully reasoned and well thought out.

[Foster Grant]

Typing or pasting text is user input.

However, typing or pasting text is not giving express permission to dynamically resize the window.

Funny ... if a text editor's dev team implemented this behavior the screaming would be endless. What makes it okay for the Pidgin dev team to do it? Nothing. They implemented a bug, took away user choice and called it a feature.

Reminds me of Microsoft.

[picpak]

ALSA shouldn't be the program getting ditched in Linux distros for something else (PulseAudio). It should be Pidgin.

[Saint Angeles]

if seeing a large message is a big deal for you, try using email.

its this new thing where you can send people large messages with all kinds of formatting and html.

but for instant messaging, i don't see why you would be sending people large important documents. the new way keeps the interface clean instead of bulky and stupid.

[Saint Angeles]

Reminds me of Microsoft.
only if you paid a lot of money for pidgin should it remind you of microsoft.

[Polygon]

i agree with that guys letter. The argument 'we are developing it for fun and what we say is law, we are just going to ingore you cause we are right you are wrong' is completely stupid. They are developing it and releasing it FOR US, why not listen to your community.

Seriously, is a checkbox to have manual resize THAT HARD????

[Polygon]

How is a resizable text box better than the auto-resizing text box? Or is it that some people are just afraid of change?

ive changed my opinion on this

dont use the 'afraid of change' argument. its stupid.

you should go jump off a bridge because some guy told you to. What? you wont do it? are you afraid of change?

I think the pidgin devs should at least LISTEN to their community. Sure its an open source program, and i dont care how open source programs work, if your ******* off your users thats a bad thing.

They could easily make this an option but they wont. Ive seen no logical arguments on why adding a option or just leaving it default like EVERY OTHER IM CLIENT ON EARTH HAS and let you resize it manually is so bad.

*has lost respect for pidgin devs*

[Saint Angeles]

ive changed my opinion on this

dont use the 'afraid of change' argument. its stupid.

you should go jump off a bridge because some guy told you to. What? you wont do it? are you afraid of change?

I think the pidgin devs should at least LISTEN to their community. Sure its an open source program, and i dont care how open source programs work, if your ******* off your users thats a bad thing.

They could easily make this an option but they wont. Ive seen no logical arguments on why adding a option or just leaving it default like EVERY OTHER IM CLIENT ON EARTH HAS and let you resize it manually is so bad.

*has lost respect for pidgin devs*
they do listen... they just don't agree.

listening != agreeing

plus pidgin works fine. why resize it manually when it can be done automatically? its less work for me.

[loell]

i
They could easily make this an option but they wont.


can you post the link on that?

[vishzilla]

Pidgin is a great app. But I feel its time to look beyond text chat and include an IM with A/V support esp in the GNOME environment. The probable replacement that comes into my mind is Empathy (http://live.gnome.org/Empathy)

[probabilityzero]

If you're all so bothered by the new auto-adjusting text box feature, just download the plugin (http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/5296) that restores the functionality of the original.

Keeping both of the two features in the program at the same time complicates things (http://pidgin.im/~elb/cgi-bin/pyblosxom.cgi/giving_back.html). The devs have good reasons why they don't do it, if you bother to read them.

IMO the new auto-resizing text box is better and more intuitive. If you disagree, feel free to use the plugin, or go use a different program. Sitting around complaining about not liking the new feature isn't going to get anyone anywhere, and the pidgin devs have no obligation to do what the users want, especially in this case where it's mainly a minority collectively whining about a small UI change..

[mrgnash]

The thing is, if they listened to everyone, then Pidgin would end up like the car that Homer Simpson designed. That holds true for Gnome, and every other open-source project as well.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

MrGnash: Exactly! It does rather amaze me how many people don't seem to consider that. Then again, Homer Simpson liked that car, and for good reason. (I think Bart did, too).

In fairness, though, Pidgin always has been a spaghetti-like option fest. I find it rather out of character for its developers to suddenly think otherwise.

A quick glance at preferences gives me some examples:
-Tab placement option
-Close button on tabs option
-Log format
-Away... Auto-reply: When away...
-Report idle time based on...
-Conversations... Show detailed information (what the heck does that mean?!)

I suspect that the Pidgin codebase is already enough a mess of random preferences to slip this one in as well.


If Pidgin gets switched for anything else, it should be a further grown Empathy (http://live.gnome.org/Empathy). The program is nicely designed, is heading some fantastic new technologies, and uses desktop integrated technologies to do its thing. (For example, Galago to determine user presence, eg. Away / Available / Busy).

Its underlying framework for messaging protocols is also very, very extensible.

[keykero]

When was the last time you paid for any instant messenger app? Compare Pidgin's functionality and usability to other instant messenger apps and it's very easy to determine where the recent distaste for the new version comes in.

[fulgencio]

All day long our bosses tell us what to do. Our wives tell us what to do. Our government tell us what to do. YOU will NOT tell us what to do.
good point !!!
I think I can respect that :)

[master5o1]

The Pidgin fork is such a stupid issue!

I would agree with the pidgin fork if it was over the input box not resizing at all -- and staying fixed at it's unfilled size. However, since it does resize, it is stupid!

[bapoumba]

Threads merged.

[nrs]

I see this as a good thing, natural selection is fun! Either we get a new and better client, replacing the old -- or that perishes and instead we learn to hold hands and sing. Either outcome is acceptable.

Personally, I am deeply irked by automated window acrobatics. And the last time I encountered "GET USED TO IT!" from a developer I completely switched to free-software. That is not an acceptable attitude. Thankfully, I don't have to get used to it. because I have a big red panic button with "GPL" written on it.

[koenn]

T...they don't give a ***** what the users want. Why bother programming software if you're not going to listen to the users?



i agree with that guys letter. The argument 'we are developing it for fun and what we say is law, we are just going to ingore you cause we are right you are wrong' is completely stupid. They are developing it and releasing it FOR US,


Anybody who believes this should be barred from writing software for anybody other than themselves, especially open-source software.


You guys should probably quit using open source software.

Most, if not all, open source projects start because one or a few developers want to write a program for themselves. Most open source developers program because they like to, and they make programs the way they see fit. And as you can easily give copies of software away, they go "here's a program, it's mine, but you can copy it and use it if you like"
Just 1 example out of many : The linux kernel was written as a hobby project by a student who wanted an operating system for his computer, an operating system that would behave the way he liked.

So, open source developers write sofware for themselves, and they make it work the ay they want it to work. You're just lucky they let you copy it, use it, re-distribute it, ...

[SuperSon!c]

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r13/bigkahunaburger1/fatgunguy2.gif http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r13/bigkahunaburger1/fatguygun.gif

[nrs]

You guys should probably quit using open source software.
That's fairly silly I think, because you're still going to be trampled on by arrogant developers. Free-software is the only thing resembling a defence against this because you can leave the herd and not starve to death.



Most, if not all, open source projects start because one or a few developers want to write a program for themselves. Most open source developers program because they like to, and they make programs the way they see fit. And as you can easily give copies of software away, they go "here's a program, it's mine, but you can copy it and use it if you like"
Just 1 example out of many : The linux kernel was written as a hobby project by a student who wanted an operating system for his computer, an operating system that would behave the way he liked.

So, open source developers write sofware for themselves, and they make it work the ay they want it to work. You're just lucky they let you copy it, use it, re-distribute it, ...

Sorry, doesn't fly. Even though projects like Pidgin may have started out as personal projects, they have had literally thousands of contributors since and virtually none of them are marketed for specific individuals.

Luck has nothing to do with it, FOSS users aren't charity cases. If they didn't grant us those freedoms, most of us probably wouldn't use it, and there'd be something to fill its gap in about 5 seconds -- infact pidgin is an example of this --

[yaztromo]

Firstly they moved the display avatar from next to the text input area to the top and made it tiny. This irks to me this day.

Now this new "feature". That's the final straw for me. I'm unwilling to use code written by rude and arrogant developers. I'm now using emesene and it's awesome.

[yaztromo]

You guys should probably quit using open source software.

Most, if not all, open source projects start because one or a few developers want to write a program for themselves. Most open source developers program because they like to, and they make programs the way they see fit.

Yeah that may be fine for small projects, but when your program is included by default in many distros and has huge following don't you think it's time you had a little care for your userbase. Your not telling me the developers would be happy if everyone stopped using Pidgin are you? Because simply isn't true.

[koenn]

That's fairly silly I think, because you're still going to be trampled on by arrogant developers. Free-software is the only thing resembling a defence against this because you can leave the herd and not starve to death.
No, the only way to get the software you want exactly the way you want it is to have it custom-made for you, and with a solid contract and a bullet-proof SLA that grants you the right the overrule the developer or your software vendor on all design-decisions.
You don't get such guarantees with any open-source program I know of. You get "This software is provided as-is". If that's not good enough, you probably shouldn't be using open source software.




Sorry, doesn't fly. Even though projects like Pidgin may have started out as personal projects, they have had literally thousands of contributors since and virtually none of them are marketed for specific individuals.

Luck has nothing to do with it, FOSS users aren't charity cases. If they didn't grant us those freedoms, most of us probably wouldn't use it, and there'd be something to fill its gap in about 5 seconds -- infact pidgin is an example of this --

There may have been thousands of contributors. So what ? They return their modificiations to the original autor or project owner, as is usual in OSS and required by most open source licenses. And I'm willing to bet that the motivation for these contributors to write and submit code was that they wanted a feature, or a bug fixed, so they just created that feature or fixed that bug. That's still miles away from the selfish whining by people who's main contribution was that they clicked on an icon or the menu-item of the program in question.
There's an other element in open source development : when you want things done, you do them. And if you've contributed a lot, people might start paying attention to your suggestions or opinions. Whining on a forum doesn't count as contributing. Nor does spamming a mailing list with demands.


I did not mention charity. I'm just saying : someone wrote a program, and lets you use it. He/she/they could also have just kept it in their closet. So you're lucky.

[koenn]

Yeah that may be fine for small projects, but when your program is included by default in many distros and has huge following don't you think it's time you had a little care for your userbase. Your not telling me the developers would be happy if everyone stopped using Pidgin are you? Because simply isn't true.

What you think is fine and what is not, or how you think the Pidgin project should threat its user base and wheter or not the fact that pidgin is included in many distros should play a role in that, is up to they people in the pidgin project.

So what I think makes the pidgin developers happy is completely irrelevant.

[raul_]

What if Ubuntu suddenly dropped out of the box wifi support or desktop effects?

[yaztromo]

He/she/they could also have just kept it in their closet. So you're lucky.

If they didn't want user input, angry users, user requests for features, happy users, all kinds of users then they should have kept it in the closet. But they didn't, and that's the fundamental flaw in your argument. Why build a community around a software project, why invite people on the front page to comment and contribute, why have a public bugtracker, why have a forum if you didn't want your users to drive the development somewhat? By all means make your own project public, but don't invite a community when you won't listen to that community.

I strongly believe in community driven software, which is what the developers have made pidgin. Any onlooker can see this is no way for the developers to behave.

[koenn]

If they didn't want user input, angry users, user requests for features, happy users, all kinds of users then they should have kept it in the closet. But they didn't, and that's the fundamental flaw in your argument. Why build a community around a software project, why invite people on the front page to comment and contribute, why have a public bugtracker, why have a forum if you didn't want your users to drive the development somewhat? By all means make your own project public, but don't invite a community when you won't listen to that community.

I strongly believe in community driven software, which is what the developers have made pidgin. Any onlooker can see this is no way for the developers to behave.

Why publish it in the first place in stead of keep it in the closet ?
That's another aspect of OSS : peer review.
Note the "peer". OSS projects go public primarily for the same reason scientists publish : to have their work reviewed, tested and commented on by fellow scientists / developers. And to allow colleagues to build on it.

Read back what I said about the relation between contributing and having your opinions taken into consideration. Also read back a couple of posts where it is explained that the pidgin devs do listen, but that "listen to" doesn"t automatically mean "agree with" or "comply with what's demanded".

The only fundamental flaw I've seen so far is the reasoning that "we are the users, so we decide".

[nrs]

OSS projects go public primarily for the same reason scientists publish : to have their work reviewed, tested and commented on by fellow scientists / developers. And to allow colleagues to build on it.


This is pretty much the case only for developers who identify explicitly with open-source, and I think demonstrates clearly why people should make a distinction between free software and open source, instead of using the two words interchangeably.

[koenn]

This is pretty much the case only for developers who identify explicitly with open-source, and I think demonstrates clearly why people should make a distinction between free software and open source, instead of using the two words interchangeably.

I'm not convinced there's that much of difference between Free Software and Open Source Software. The term "Open Source Software" was coined in an attempt to get rid of the confusion around "Free" (beer, speech), mainly to make Free (speech) licenses acceptible to businesses (who'd think that free means "no profits"). For the same reason, OSS shifts the focus to the development model rather than the "software freedom" ideology FSF / GNU stands for.

But in 98% of the cases, they're talking about the same software. The distinction only makes sense on a phylosophical, ideological or strategic level. Since we're talking about software and its development, the term OSS seems appropriate, but just the same, as Pidgin is licensed under GPL, we could be using the term "Free software".

[yaztromo]

Hmm, you seemed to completely ignore most of my argument and then claim Pidgin was published for peer review by fellow colleagues. GAIM was published for other people to use, it certainly wasn't done for the reasons you state. And even if it was created for peer review that still doesn't explain why they've intentionally created a community they choose to ignore. They certainly like to bite the hand that feeds them.

Yes they listen, but that's all they ever do. In most cases they reject user opinion and decide that there decision is superior even when it's obvious to all they are ruining the software.

[nrs]

I'm not convinced there's that much of difference between Free Software and Open Source Software. The term "Open Source Software" was coined in an attempt to get rid of the confusion around "Free" (beer, speech), mainly to make Free (speech) licenses acceptible to businesses (who'd think that free means "no profits"). For the same reason, OSS shifts the focus to the development model rather than the "software freedom" ideology FSF / GNU stands for.

But in 98% of the cases, they're talking about the same software. The distinction only makes sense on a phylosophical, ideological or strategic level. Since we're talking about software and its development, the term OSS seems appropriate, but just the same, as Pidgin is licensed under GPL, we could be using the term "Free software".

You're right of course, practically speaking there is no difference between the two. -- Most of the time -- The difference is on a philosophical level. That doesn't mean that a distinction should not be made, because there is one, even if it is abstract. As you said earlier;


OSS projects go public primarily for the same reason scientists publish : to have their work reviewed, tested and commented on by fellow scientists / developers. And to allow colleagues to build on it.

This is the central theme to those identifying with open source, and merely a benefit to those that identify with free software. You can argue it's a case of The People's Front of Judea vs. The Judean People's Front, but I think ti's a little more complicated, the fact that all free software == open source but not all open source == free software speaks to this, I think.

[SuperSon!c]

...even when it's obvious to all they are ruining the software.

no, it's only "obvious" to some.

[koenn]

Hmm, you seemed to completely ignore most of my argument and then claim Pidgin was published for peer review by fellow colleagues. GAIM was published for other people to use, it certainly wasn't done for the reasons you state. And even if it was created for peer review that still doesn't explain why they've intentionally created a community they choose to ignore. They certainly like to bite the hand that feeds them.

Yes they listen, but that's all they ever do. In most cases they reject user opinion and decide that there decision is superior even when it's obvious to all they are ruining the software.

I gather "most of your argument" centered around "why have users/forum/.... if you're not going to do what they tell you". I think I answered to that. Anything else ?

And why create a community ? To recrute help for the development of the project.
http://developer.pidgin.im/wiki/PidginCommunity#CanIhelp

Community Topics ¶
Can I help? ¶

Yes! We especially need small patches for small bugs, and lots of bug triaging. There are a slew of a bug reports in Pidgin's ticket system - you could pick one and try to tackle it and submit a patch. We love patches!

...

[23meg]

I love the following quote from http://pidgin.im/~elb/cgi-bin/pyblosxom.cgi/giving_back.html; it strikes the issue at the core:


...some Free Software users seem to think that their right to use and modify software extends to a right to have software modified for them...

That's the end of it: the license you receive the software under gives you no entitlement to have it modified for you by the provider (which is what implementing or taking out a feature according to your desires essentially is), but does give you very liberal rights to modify it yourself.

And people who weren't happy with the changes did modify it themselves. They wrote a plugin, published patches, and started a silly fork. They have the functionality they want now.

That is the free software model at work.

The endless complaining and mostly unsubstantiated mudslinging in this thread and others is an unfortunate carryover from the proprietary software model: use the software as a passive consumer, and when you're unhappy with a change that's introduced, go into complaining and gossip mode, voice your rushed dissent all over the web, insult the opposing party without even listening to their rationale (oh the irony) and do nothing else.

[QCompson]

That's the end of it: the license you receive the software under gives you no entitlement to have it modified for you by the provider (which is what implementing or taking out a feature according to your desires essentially is), but does give you very liberal rights to modify it yourself.

And people who weren't happy with the changes did modify it themselves. They wrote a plugin, published patches, and started a silly fork. They have the functionality they want now.

That is the free software model at work.

The endless complaining and mostly unsubstantiated mudslinging in this thread and others is an unfortunate carryover from the proprietary software model: use the software as a passive consumer, and when you're unhappy with a change that's introduced, go into complaining and gossip mode, voice your rushed dissent all over the web, insult the opposing party without even listening to their rationale (oh the irony) and do nothing else.

If developers want feedback, they're going to have to live with feedback they don't want to hear. I found the developers endless responses of, "but tell us WHY you don't like it. Give us technical reasons in the form of X, Y, and Z" to be silly. They did not seem willing to seriously consider any feedback.

And I don't believe it was the case that users weren't listening to the developer's rationale for this new "feature". The dissenters simply don't like the change. No amount of logical argument is going to change a user's mind about a GUI shift they find aesthetically upsetting.

But as you point out, none of this matters. If people don't like the changes, they are free to modify or fork the project (as happened) or use another program.

Personally, I found the behavior of the Pidgin developers to be distasteful throughout this controversy. They certainly don't seem to have much of a community-orientated mindset for the Pidgin project. I only wish there was another yahoo compatible IM program using GTK. Anyone have any suggestions?

[23meg]

I found the developers endless responses of, "but tell us WHY you don't like it. Give us technical reasons in the form of X, Y, and Z" to be silly. They did not seem willing to seriously consider any feedback.

Why is it silly? Why is it not "considering feedback" in your book? This is a genuine question; I truly don't understand, and your post leaves the reason vague.



And I don't believe it was the case that users weren't listening to the developer's rationale for this new "feature". The dissenters simply don't like the change. No amount of logical argument is going to change a user's mind about a GUI shift they find aesthetically upsetting.

People are absolutely entitled not to like certain changes made to software they use. I do it all the time. What they aren't entitled to is bossing and harassing others because of those, spreading FUD with unbased claims, and taking every opportunity to bash a project and the people behind it in whole ("The Pidgin developers are idiots as far as I'm concerned") rather than sanely criticizing specifics in it that they aren't happy about ("I really dislike the new text input box. It's a bad idea because..")

As for not listening to the rationale, I don't mean the people who participated in the original bug tracker discussion; I mean the people who just seemingly like to ride on the "Pidgin's developers suck because.." bandwagon without any real first hand experience with them and without any substantiation to their attacks other than what they've heard second hand from a random forum user they know nothing about. Really, think of it: "Pidgin developers don't listen to the users" is the second biggest meme of this kind after the "Linus vs. GNOME" thing.

Interestingly, just like how the public GNOME hate on the interwebs grew tenfold after Linus' outburst, the Pidgin hate grew tenfold with the input box case. Everyone was pretty fine with GNOME's simplicity before Linus said it was too much, as it were. Everyone was quite fine with Pidgin before the input box case, as it were. Food for thought.

[tbroderick]

What happens if i have to post a page of my essay im writing and i have to change a few words or something?

Use a text editor to make the changes before you send it...:-k

I like the new change. Death to white-spaces!!!

[QCompson]

Why is it silly? Why is it not "considering feedback" in your book? This is a genuine question; I truly don't understand, and your post leaves the reason vague.
Because the Pidgin developers rejected all feedback that wasn't based on what they considered reasonable grounds. Essentially, they ended up rejecting all feedback, because they dismissed all criticism as unreasonable. In my opinion, they had their minds made up from the beginning, and nothing was going to sway them.

Here is a developer comment (from this (http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/5559) page):
"No one has dismissed any criticism, least of all me, what I have dismissed is backless assertions of pure preference..."

Why would developers dismiss the preferences of users for a particular feature? Especially when so many users have been so vocal about their displeasure and when the criticism was primarily based on (backless) aesthetic grounds? Why is an assertion of preference not a reasonable criticism?


People are absolutely entitled not to like certain changes made to software they use. I do it all the time. What they aren't entitled to is bossing and harassing others because of those, spreading FUD with unbased claims, and taking every opportunity to bash a project and the people behind it in whole ("The Pidgin developers are idiots as far as I'm concerned") rather than sanely criticizing specifics in it that they aren't happy about ("I really dislike the new text input box. It's a bad idea because..")

As for not listening to the rationale, I don't mean the people who participated in the original bug tracker discussion; I mean the people who just seemingly like to ride on the "Pidgin's developers suck because.." bandwagon without any real first hand experience with them and without any substantiation to their attacks other than what they've heard second hand from a random forum user they know nothing about. Really, think of it: "Pidgin developers don't listen to the users" is the second biggest meme of this kind after the "Linus vs. GNOME" thing.

Interestingly, just like how the public GNOME hate on the interwebs grew tenfold after Linus' outburst, the Pidgin hate grew tenfold with the input box case. Everyone was pretty fine with GNOME's simplicity before Linus said it was too much, as it were. Everyone was quite fine with Pidgin before the input box case, as it were. Food for thought.
While I agree the flamewagon trend is unfortunate, users most certainly are entitled to "bossing and harassing others because of those, spreading FUD with unbased claims, and taking every opportunity to bash a project and the people behind it." This isn't the preferred behavior, but nevertheless is common behavior on the internet. You can't have it both ways. The Pidgin developers aren't being paid by users so users shouldn't expect the developers to work on their terms and follow their commands. Similarly, the users aren't beholden to the Pidgin developers in any way so the developers should not be surprised at such reactions to significant (and unpopular) UI changes. If the developers don't like the attitude of their users and refuse to acquiesce their criticism with program changes, then they should tell the disgruntled users to **** off. (This is, I believe, the path they have chosen.)

No one said the Pidgin developers had to follow the whim of every user who complains about a certain feature. Yet on the other hand, there is no requirement that a user upset by a feature change in a program should quietly accept the superior wisdom of the developers and hope that they get used to the change in the future. The best they can do is express their displeasure and move on (to forks or other programs).

Pugnacious harassment and FUD spreading is not helpful, but to be honest, I didn't see a lot of that from the users. I saw frustration. After hundreds of people complained about the feature change, they were met with responses similar to: "your personal preferences don't matter," or, "if you don't like our change, code something yourself or use another program."

Perhaps this is how open-source should work. If enough people become tired of the direction that Pidgin is going, maybe eventually it will fade into obscurity, and a fork will take over. Or, maybe people will really start to love the auto-resizing input box and Pidgin will start a new trend in IM programs. It will all work out in the end... I just wish there were more options for yahoo using people on linux.

[bikeboy]

I like the new change. Death to white-spaces!!!

Agreed. The very first time I noticed the change it did confuse me a little, I thought something was wrong. Then I found out about the change and tried it. Works like a charm.

Yesterday, I did some testing by copy & pasting a long phrase into the box, it works as well as you could possibly want it to. If you start to run out of overall room, enlarging the whole window works well and removes scrollbars. In fact, when I tried to send the large slab of text, it wasn't allowed because (presumably MSN) deemed it too large.

I really fail to see how anything that fits the scope of IM would be difficult with this change, I sincerely do. It's one of those things I no longer notice.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

In my opinion, they had their minds made up from the beginning, and nothing was going to sway them.And this is bad... how?

Linus owns the trademark to Linux and is unlikely to change it, even if a million people tell him to call it something lame like "FreeKernel"; fact is, Linux is a good name. He is responsible for it, so I think he deserves some exclusivity in such a thing.
Now, thanks to the model he so kindly released the thing under, someone else can indeed branch Linux and call their tree "FreeKernel" *shudder*. Isn't that generous of him? What's more? That person could go ahead and bloat it with binary blobs, remove kernel tainting and open up some of the arbitrary GPL-only stuff to everyone.

The same idea applies here. The Pidgin developers are not some mysterious, invisible energy; they are the people who you can thank for Pidgin, libpurple, etc., without whom none of it would exist. Again, they have the final say in the program's direction, just as they had the first say in how it would begin. They are not your servants, and they did not volunteer to be your servants.
Those developers were kind enough to make it possible for "FunPidgin" to legally exist. Cool, eh? I, for one, see no negatives here whatsoever, and I think anyone who does is crazy. That, or we have discovered a corner of the Internet with startlingly high concentration of Tourettes syndrome.

As for the "community has the say" thing, does anybody else find it telling that the core development community is pretty much agreed on auto resizing? This is a similar case to why GNOME switched screensaver systems; sure, end users didn't like it for the immediately visible reasons, but the technical enhancements and changes coming sideways from the change far outweigh that.


Anyway, the wonderful Pidgin community has created such an unhappy atmosphere that I, a user who likes the change, have chosen to switch programs simply to escape the radiant heat.


Or, maybe people will really start to love the auto-resizing input box and Pidgin will start a new trend in IM programs.This isn't a new trend in IM programs. This is how every other IM program works, making it all the more ridiculous that there is such an uproar. Then again, I suppose it could be argued that the manually sized input box was the new trend unfortunately ceased. I do think it is a shame to lose that given that any kind of "ink" feature would require a manally sized input, and the way Microsoft's MSN messenger does that (changing tabs makes the box a different size) is really horrible. However, I for one am confident that there is a decent reason here, and I did find the unobtrusive input box quite nice to work with.

[QCompson]

And this is bad... how?

Linus owns the trademark to Linux and is unlikely to change it, even if a million people tell him to call it something lame like "FreeKernel"; fact is, Linux is a good name. He is responsible for it, so I think he deserves some exclusivity in such a thing.
Now, thanks to the model he so kindly released the thing under, someone else can indeed branch Linux and call their tree "FreeKernel" *shudder*. Isn't that generous of him? What's more? That person could go ahead and bloat it with binary blobs, remove kernel tainting and open up the GPL-only stuff to everyone.

The same idea applies here. The Pidgin developers are not some mysterious, invisible energy; they are the people who you can thank for Pidgin, libpurple, etc., without whom none of it would exist. Again, they have the final say in the program's direction, just as they had the first say in how it would begin.
Those developers were kind enough to make it possible for "FunPidgin" (Pidgin "one-million-monkeys-at-a-typewriter edition") to legally exist. Cool, eh? I, for one, see no negatives here whatsoever, and I think anyone who does is crazy. That, or we have discovered a corner of the Internet with startlingly high concentration of Tourettes syndrome.


Anyway, the wonderful Pidgin community has created such an unhappy atmosphere that I, a user who likes the change, have chosen to switch programs simply to escape the radiant heat.

If the Pidgin developers truly want to accept no input from users and are willing to forge their way forward based solely on the whims and ideas of the development team, then I agree, there is nothing bad about this.

I would argue that user input and preferences can be helpful for developers. Assuming, of course, that said developers have any interest whatsoever in pleasing their user base.

While I think your analogy is flawed (renaming a software project is very different from substantially changing the way the UI interacts with the user), I agree that nothing "bad" will result from this controversy. Either the developers will convince everyone that their modification is superior, or the users will eventually migrate away from the project.

I, for one, am not going to grovel before any developer who adopts the GPL license simply because they were "kind enough" to develop for me. I am very appreciative of people who develop open-source software, and am willing to financially contribute to show my support, but I will not accept this as a take-whatever-I-can-get proposition. That would only serve to lower the standard of OSS altogether.

Edit:

This isn't a new trend in IM programs. This is how every other IM program works, making it all the more ridiculous
that there is such an uproar.
I must really be out of the loop. No other IM programs allow you to manually resize the input field?!? Last I knew, most other IM programs allowed for this.

[mike1772]

I'm concerned") rather than sanely criticizing specifics in it that they aren't happy about ("I really dislike the new text input box. It's a bad idea because..")



Well, I really dislike the new text input box. It's a bad idea because it takes away my ability to size the input box in a manner that is visually pleasing and functionally usable for my needs. I've look through most of the settings but I can't find a way to make the input box a fixed size. Can anyone tell me how to make it stop resizing as I type as it is visually distracting. Further - if the message window is sized full screen the default size for the input box looks unbalanced (to be honest it looks unbalanced at the default size as well). The new input box might be more usable for someone who doesn't know how to type - as I do know how to type I look at the screen when I type - not at the keyboard. A resizing box distracts from the message - which would be fine in a program who's main purpose is not the message in question - in this case it detracts from the main functionality of the application in question. Though I realize that this is an opinion others may not share the points I make are valid and it doesn't look like they will be addressed by the developers. If they could give me a method that the input box was approximately 50% of the entire window that would be awesome - provided it was then a fixed size.

While I realize that my ranting will not get any changes made - I wanted to add a little more than 'because I want it that way' and provide reasons why. I read the entire thread on the bug tracker and I must say (with all due respect) that the developers seem to come off as childish in this issue. Not to say some of the users don't as well - but I expected more from the developers.

[bikeboy]

Hmmm, x-chat only gives me one line, and it doesn't resize. Better fork it!

[raul_]

Hmmm, x-chat only gives me one line, and it doesn't resize. Better fork it!

When did it give more than one?

[wersdaluv]

If I'm not mistaken, this is just like pidgin+more features. Am I right? Haven't tried it yet, though.

I think that the added features are great.

Will this fork include all the updates to Pidgin in the future or will this have it's own road?

[nrs]

I don't remember people being up in arms like this over beryl.

[TeraDyne]

This isn't a new trend in IM programs. This is how every other IM program works, making it all the more ridiculous that there is such an uproar. Then again, I suppose it could be argued that the manually sized input box was the new trend unfortunately ceased. I do think it is a shame to lose that given that any kind of "ink" feature would require a manally sized input, and the way Microsoft's MSN messenger does that (changing tabs makes the box a different size) is really horrible. However, I for one am confident that there is a decent reason here, and I did find the unobtrusive input box quite nice to work with.

I can manually resize the chat input box in Kopete, Trillain(for Windows), and even the main ICQ\MSNM\AIM\YIM\etc in Windows. Now, what other IM clients have you used that disable manual resizing of the chat input area?

[MattBD]

I dumped Pidgin for Kopete earlier this year. Now I'm waiting for a Linux version of Digsby - the best IM client I've ever seen!

[SuperSon!c]

14 pages of crying about text area resizing. ffs.

[raul_]

14 pages of crying about text area resizing. ffs.

We read the last 5 times you said it in this thread :popcorn:

[DigitalDuality]

d

[SuperSon!c]

We read the last 5 times you said it in this thread :popcorn:

sorry, only a couple of times - this compared to the number of times someone's bitching about the pidgin devs. just don't use the damn software if it's that big of a deal to you. obviously they're not changing their minds.

:roflpopcorn:

[SuperSon!c]

I can't wait for Digsby to come out with a linux version. If digsby gets encryption support via OTR somehow, i'll be a happy happy man.

true true, i love that app.

[TeraDyne]

sorry, only a couple of times - this compared to the number of times someone's bitching about the pidgin devs. just don't use the damn software if it's that big of a deal to you. obviously they're not changing their minds.

:roflpopcorn:

For some people, though, it's more of a problem of "ethics" and the fact that Pidgin is default for Ubuntu. You can't even install ubuntu-desktop without having it install pidgin, and uninstalling it becomes a pain later down the line.

Personally, I don't care anymore. I use Kopete, and I find it to be superior to Pidgin thanks to the theming capabilities.

[SuperSon!c]

i can understand that, but maybe the community needs to bitch to the ubuntu devs to remove it as a default IM application.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

Ubuntu's metapackage is quite sane now, actually. First off, no, ubuntu-desktop does not depend on Pidgin (at least in Hardy), so you can go ahead and pull it. Secondly, there is another package called ubuntu-minimal which lives even after all the default user-facing applications are pulled. It is my understanding that its presence (no longer ubuntu-desktop alone) will ensure happy upgrading.

I seem to recall that applications which populate the menu used to all be dependencies, but they are now Recommended packages instead :)

[TeraDyne]

Ubuntu's metapackage is quite sane now, actually. First off, no, ubuntu-desktop does not depend on Pidgin (at least in Hardy), so you can go ahead and pull it. Secondly, there is another package called ubuntu-minimal which lives even after all the default user-facing applications are pulled. It is my understanding that its presence (no longer ubuntu-desktop alone) will ensure happy upgrading.

I seem to recall that applications which populate the menu used to all be dependencies, but they are now Recommended packages instead :)

Good to know they did that for Hardy. Sadly, it currently doesn't work on my PC. It has problems with my SATA drives, and the workaround causes more problems than it helps. Therefore, I'm still using Gutsy.

[Bruno Barrera]

i agree with that guys letter. The argument 'we are developing it for fun and what we say is law, we are just going to ingore you cause we are right you are wrong' is completely stupid. They are developing it and releasing it FOR US, why not listen to your community.

Seriously, is a checkbox to have manual resize THAT HARD????

Open source software is not develped for you of for anyone else. It developed by people who want something for themselves. If other people want to use it, well great, but they ain't the point.

http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm - Problem #4

And the resizeable textbox.... jesus, it AUTOMATICALLY resizes... if you have a HUGE message, MAXIMIZE your window. If it even bigger than that then no matter how big your message is you'll still have to scroll.

Get 4 monitors if you really dont want to scroll.

[QCompson]

Open source software is not develped for you of for anyone else. It developed by people who want something for themselves. If other people want to use it, well great, but they ain't the point.
That's a little disingenuous, don't you think? If the pidgin developers truly only developed the program for themselves, why even bother having a website or allow users to submit bugs?

I always thought one of the nice things about many opensource projects is that they encouraged community support.


And the resizeable textbox.... jesus, it AUTOMATICALLY resizes... if you have a HUGE message, MAXIMIZE your window. If it even bigger than that then no matter how big your message is you'll still have to scroll.

Get 4 monitors if you really dont want to scroll.
Well, that's precisely the problem that a lot of people seem to have with the new behavior... it automatically resizes. I don't think maximizing the window is much of a solution. The real solution at this point for users unhappy with the change is to use the plugin or funpidgin, or use another IM program.

[raul_]

Actually, i've been playing devil's advocate here.

I'm a software engineering student and I can see the point of the Pidgin developers. Altough they were somewhat rude in that mail, I can understand their point.

I'll not defend them (unfair, because i've been attacking them), but from this thread, i guess it's obvious that the opinions are divided and many people share de Pidgin's developers point of view, so *I*'ll cut them some slack.

[GavinZac]

I'd imagine 99% of pidgin users don't care either way, or will have even noticed.

[23meg]

Good to know they did that for Hardy. Sadly, it currently doesn't work on my PC. It has problems with my SATA drives, and the workaround causes more problems than it helps. Therefore, I'm still using Gutsy.

This (recommends instead of depends for default installed apps) has been the case since Feisty.

[TeraDyne]

This (recommends instead of depends for default installed apps) has been the case since Feisty.

Really? That's strange. Last time I installed ubuntu-desktop, and then tried to remove pidgin to install kopete, I could have swore it said it couldn't. Maybe I'm confusing it with something else...

[bikeboy]

Hmmm, x-chat only gives me one line, and it doesn't resize. Better fork it!


When did it give more than one?

That's the point, it never did because it's unnecessary for the types of messages that the program is designed for.

Note: I did read your later Devil's advocate post :)

[SuperSon!c]

I'd imagine 99% of pidgin users don't care either way, or will have even noticed.

i'm one of those. i had no idea what was being discussed then read and tried it myself - shrugged and dismissed.

[praveenmarkandu]

i think most of you are missing the point. its not about some stupid customizable input box height. its about pidgin devs.

some of them are just so close minded it bugs the hell out of me. some could call it arrogant. i have been asking for better msn support on their IRC channel. all i get is a bunch of excuses on how the MSN protocol sucks and microsoft cant do anything right. regardless of whether MSN is a good protocol or not, MANY people use it even if the devs dont.

when pidgin 2.4.0 came out there was a 1pixel input bug because of some fault in the GTK it was bundled with. quick fix was to revert to an old version of GTK. COMMON! are you saying that no one even tested the release on a windows machine before they pushed it to the public? they expect the user to figure out that it was a GTK error and roll back? thats not even half professional.

the other day adium came out with a blog post on implementing the facebook jabber chat into adium. a pidgin developer said that they were not going to use "dirty hacks" to implement a "closed protocol". excuse me...but arent all these protocols closed. most of them have to be reversed engineered to work.

sean eagan (ex head pidgin dev) talked about using webkit for message styles like how adium does. i dont know how much the actual pidgin dev team has done, but to show you a comparison of frame of mind, someone on funpidgin already posted on how to accomplish this http://funpidgin.sourceforge.net/forums/how-tos/webkitadium-message-styles-howto

you dont even have to compare funpidgin with pidgin. adium already blows pidgin out of the water and its based on libpurple. some could argue pidgin devs just dont have as much time... i say they just dont give enough care.

[khc]

when pidgin 2.4.0 came out there was a 1pixel input bug because of some fault in the GTK it was bundled with. quick fix was to revert to an old version of GTK. COMMON! are you saying that no one even tested the release on a windows machine before they pushed it to the public? they expect the user to figure out that it was a GTK error and roll back? thats not even half professional.


It wasn't a GTK bug, it was a pidgin bug that only occurs in some cases, and is not limited to Windows.



sean eagan (ex head pidgin dev) talked about using webkit for message styles like how adium does. i dont know how much the actual pidgin dev team has done, but to show you a comparison of frame of mind, someone on funpidgin already posted on how to accomplish this http://funpidgin.sourceforge.net/forums/how-tos/webkitadium-message-styles-howto


Guess how they did it? They took code that Sean wrote, and then compiled it.