I can see some people being rubbed the wrong way by the language in this post but it sounds like a reasonable criticism by someone who has gotten tired and annoyed, and seems to mostly represent accurately the discussion in that ticket.
Does anyone know a decent counterpoint to this? Or an argument why Gnome is being reasonable?
Well, I don't really think the Gnome is being reasonable since they've ditched 2.34 for 3.0 pre-pre-pre-alpha and started to shove their "supremacy" to everyone. I do really think this has nothing to do with normal community open source project but more like being thightly controlled by a corporation that focuses on tickets and changes for sake of doing something because someone (and their managers) has to report and prove being sallary-worthy. So the project is dissolving (itself; the linux "desktop"; and the public view about it; and what is the most important - the at least somehow unified user experience we used to have across major gui toolkits) in a highly-toxic-and-radioactive-"opinionated" egos.
> Well, I don't really think the Gnome is being reasonable since they've ditched 2.34 for 3.0 pre-pre-pre-alpha and started to shove their "supremacy" to everyone.
Do you by chance know of an article that documents that? I remember seeing one back then that compiled discussions with gnome developers from multiple sources showing that, but I've lost it since then.
> "You are only supposed to run GNOME apps on GNOME"
This summarizes the problem quite well, not only that GNOME apps are often broken outside GNOME, but if you try to run non-GNOME app on GNOME (even Gtk based) you might get broken apps because system tray (AppIndicator) isn't there or some other random bs where the functionality is removed for the sake of making users frustrated. This is somewhat similar to deletionist culture of wikipedia, delete delete delete. Basically work done outside of GNOME junta isn't valued and even if accepted might be removed in the next release.
I looked into GNOME's gitlab discussions linked here and in the article, and I was appalled at GNOME maintainers' behavior on each and every one of them. Whenever app developers raise concerns that they don't have the adequate means to integrate with the GNOME desktop, GNOME maintainers consistently fault the developers and close the ticket without addressing the issue at all.
The worst part is that despite all this, a GNOME Foundation community manager even lied about the whole thing [1], claiming that MPV never even contacted GNOME before dropping support. He also talked about how the lack of cooperation was hurting the FOSS community [2], even though many app developers including MPV did in fact share their concerns on GNOME's gitlab issue tracker [3][4] and it was GNOME maintainers that chose to ignore them.
I've been using the GNOME for quite some time, but it's time for me to switch. Some applications didn't look quite right recently, and now I know the reason why.
But as for the idle inhibiting API, there is some (slow) progress in the form of two MRs. And they weren't closed outright, some code review took place instead:
Existence of locale means you essentially cannot safely use standard libc string functions in library code or in threaded software, particularly when interacting with a file format where stuff like number formatting is normative.
The fixes are really pretty incomplete and the result is people ending up having to ship their own implementations of these functions ... which interacts poorly with all the effort going in to harden string functions because they're a constant source of vulnerabilities.
The situation for libraries that call libraries where the middle library really needs to get things right and the called library can be more YOLO about it is ... pretty absurd.
Add this to the fact that the vast majority of libc functions are either obsolete or simply designed for another era, and it can become a quite daunting feat trying to write C code without shooting yourself in the face. C++ isn't in a great position either (the whole std::locale fiasco is very similar), but at least the standards since C++11 have had the guts to actually attempt fixing the warts instead of simply ignoring problems altogether.
All C standards since C99 have been ugly mishmashes of C++ features and bad ideas, one after another. What everyone was clearly asking them was to just copy-paste stuff from POSIX, and instead they came up with stupid nonsense like VLA or things nobody uses, like the [static N] syntax for arrays.
I also still find absurd someone thought it was a good idea to add stuff as critical as threads.h without asking implementers first if they liked it (fun fact no one did).
What I think is a massive indicator of how much disconnected they are from reality is the "memory safe string handling" they added in C11 with those crappy *_s functions, which a. were just annoyingly slightly different from what POSIX and Win32 had and b. used a totally lunatic error reporting system based on callbacks and `set_constraint_handler_s()` - because obviously when a call to memset_s() fails I totally want a random function to run, for what for I still don't understand after 9 years.
People just wanted the BSD's _l functions, and they gave them a memcpy() that called a random callback. No wonder C2X just wants to quietly pretend these abominations nobody ever implemented never happened.
What no one has ever had enough guts to admit is that 1. C strings, i.e. null-terminated strings, were a terrible mistake and 2. that C badly needs a new string library, or at least something that people can use without risking leaking their whole address space by accident.
Reading all that makes me wonder - wouldn't the best solution simply be to dike out setlocale()? Maybe LD_PRELOAD or some linker fiddle (StackOverflow tells me this is possible). A lot of issues seem to be caused by random third party linked code calling setlocale() and breaking stuff.
Interesting. Confirms some suspicions I had re: why my recent attempts to use Gnome under Wayland were... more interesting than I'd hoped. That exchange matches what I'd imagined their attitude must be to have produced software behaving that way.
They finally managed to convert me to KDE after 20 years, so that's something.
Snew hasn't been updated in a couple years, its author is focused on a decentralized reddit called https://notabug.io
I'm the author of https://www.reveddit.com/about/. It's a fork of removeddit that adds features like user pages and notifications when your content is removed.
Back in the day, that's roughly how web developers would frame it when they tried to rationalize making websites that would deliberately refuse to load if the user-agent said something other than "MSIE".
Removing support is a passive action; you accomplish it by just doing nothing. Calling exit() is rather more on the aggressive side.
All that said, good on 'em. I got a decent chuckle.
They spent the last 9 years dismantling their platform one piece at a time. I think they are too committed with their design now to admit they completely screwed up by betting on a vision it never managed to take off, and differently than Microsoft, they don't need to actually listen to their users because they don't have enterprise users they really need to sell their product to (but Red Hat does, and that's why "Gnome Classic" is still around).
Except, if the vast majority of your bug reports come from that Desktop Environment, and noone wants to step up and support it, this might be the best option.
I've worked on projects where I have wanted to do similar things, just refuse to work on systems i know are buggy and I do not have the time to fix.
Since GNOME 3 has launched almost 10 ago, the whole environment has been crashing down an endless downward spiral of shortsightedness and idiocy. Replacing what was probably one of the clearest and simplest UIs ever made for an iPad-like, user-hostile interface that threw away decades of well known, polished UX was a gigantic, unforgivable middle finger to their users.
A clumsy, me-too shitfest of minimalism that never managed to achieve anything but complicating computing by removing things, all for the sake of an unrealistic ideal of simplicity that nobody ever asked for.
GNOME 2 was _already_ simple, intuitive and clear. It was feature rich, but easy to understand and use.
GNOME 3 removed everything, feature by feature, without realising that everything was simply becoming more complicated. Having to install at least 3 extensions in order to make a desktop environment behave the way it is supposed to is asinine, and it feels like they totally forgot who their target users are.
Plus, GNOME has been deliberately hostile towards anything non-GNOME for so long now that I am surprised there aren't more people out there telling them to screw themselves. GTK+ has also been monopolised by them and it's become harder release after release to keep track to what they were doing to the point that some devs actually found rewriting everything using Qt a more productive way to spend their time.
Not only they removed everything randomly (just a few things that I remember: terminal transparency/background, search on the local directory on nautilus, zoom on gnome shell) but it is still one of the most heavy DEs (the new KDE is surprisingly light) somehow when even my DWM has more features. Sadly I have only 8GB of ram and I want to run more programs than just the gnome shell (which takes as much memory as the average electron application).
As for gtk, they still have not merged the patch for thumbnails in the open file dialog.
> gnome shell (which takes as much memory as the average electron application).
I don't know a ton about it but I assume gnome-shell is where all the JS (which I gather is a huge thing in Gnome now) runs, judging from how crashy and resource-gobbling it is.
> the new KDE is surprisingly light
I had a strong aversion to KDE because I never liked how it made non-K* apps feel out-of-place, and I prefer almost none of the K* apps to other (largely GTK) alternatives, plus it used to be (talking many years ago) far heavier both in feel/performance and compile time than Gnome, but yeah, that's what I've switched to, and it performs far better. "Foreign" apps no longer feel as out-of-place as they used to and with some tweaking I don't hate the appearance.
What they've done to Gnome is so bizarre. I even kinda like the look & feel but damn, it's way too big a pig to be always-on on my machine.
KDE went from being a resource hog (~2009) to working somewhat fine on the Raspberry Pi 4 and on old machines. Meanwhile, GNOME Shell lags on my somewhat high end computer and the solution everyone told me was to "disable animations". GNOME 2 with Beryl and the cheap "burning windows" effects actually felt more polished and ran smoother than the burning heap of rubbish GNOME 3 has become, honestly.
KDE 4 on opensuse back in 2011 felt lighter than xp for me at least (It worked fine on a laptop with sis graphics, intel Pentium M, and 1.5GB ram). It was around the time that gnome 3 was released I think and when I tried it I immediately was greeted with an error message about lacking graphics acceleration.
I've been an Xfce user since 2004 (and was a core developer until 2009), and continue to use it to this day. My biggest worry is that, since the GNOME folks control GTK+, it will morph into something that non-GNOME projects (like Xfce) can't realistically use.
Granted, Xfce has gone through a toolkit change before, but switching again would be too much of a burden.
I feel like there was a sweet spot in the mid and late 00s when there were efforts to promote cross-desktop standards (the "XDG" in those environment variables means "cross-desktop group") that made it easier to write apps that would integrate well with any environment, regardless of what toolkit you were using. But at some point in the early 10s that degenerated into GNOME ramming "standards" down people's throats and going their own way without any attempt to work with the rest of the community.
It's an interesting coincidence that systemd's rise (with similar standards-forcing and advocacy for tight coupling) was somewhat concurrent with GNOME's descent into community hostility.
> My biggest worry is that, since the GNOME folks control GTK+, it will morph into something that non-GNOME projects (like Xfce) can't realistically use.
Speaking of window decorations, the arguments from GNOME developers on this issue are nuts. Do they really not understand why games etc need this, or that literally every other desktop environment (including Windows and macOS) provides an equivalent facility?
Both Windows and macOS only provide one API to create a window and could switch to CSD-only tomorrow without anyone noticing. In a way they already have since they work differently anyway (no server/client architecture).
So they are a bad example as they went the toolkit-way, which GNOME also wants.
I'm not even sure about Mac, but in Windows, there's no distinction, because there's no "client" and "server". But from developers' perspective, it's less about CSD vs SSD, and more about being able to say, "I just want standard window decorations, please and thank you", vs not being able to.
Gnome devs' suggestion to just use Gtk3 for this is not really equivalent, because on both Windows and macOS, the library that offers the window creation API is core part of the OS - it's technically a dependency, yes, but it's the one that nobody actually cares about. On Linux, Gtk3 is a dependency that people do care about, because it's not guaranteed to be present, and requiring it often means doubling the sheer number of packages that an app like that might need.
Gnome doesn't care, because they see themselves as a platform akin to Windows and Mac - so if you intend your app to run on Gnome, then you compile it for Gnome (and then assume that Gtk3 is always there). But, of course, this attitude amounts to saying that they don't really care about compatibility with apps for "just Linux". Which is exactly why they're getting so much pushback on this.
I am so curious what changed in the Gnome team between 2 and 3. The DE's seem diametrically opposed in philosophy, functionality and ergonomics. Was there a coup? Did the whole Gnome 2 team just stop and was the project taken over by some sort of other group?
iPhone was released ~3 years before GNOME 3.0, and iPad a year or so before. Some people in computing thought our touchscreen future was both wonderful and inevitable, and it guided the design of GNOME 3 (touch friendly, focused on a single app at a time).
I can barely figure out how to use the GTK+3 open dialog
- why is "recent items" first?
- why are the folders down the side random paths?
- why is there no place to enter a path?
- why does it do a recursive search when I type in the window?
how to make an open dialog was pretty much perfected by MS 20 years ago
> 3. Because of 1, 2, and 4. Use ^L, when you need it.
> 4. Same as 1.
> ... saves tons of time
No. It really fucking doesn't.
How is it ever supposed to be faster to try and figure out which search result for 'index.html' is the file in the somewhat-cluttered folder I just fucking navigated to for the express purpose of opening index.html, so that I don't end up selecting another file named 'index.html' from one of the subfolders? Just jump to the goddamn file in the current folder as I type, it's so much faster, and it's what everyone who has ever used the type-while-in-a-file-dialog feature expects to happen anyway.
Also how have people not figured out that file search on your local computer kinda really sucks? The stuff you want to search for probably doesn't have a unique/meaningful file name. Folders namespace non-unique file names, and the full path then has some semantic meaning. And since humans are pretty good at semantics, we seem to be pretty good at navigating the semantic hierarchy of where we put stuff. Recursive search makes you read some inevitably tiny and low-contrast text to get the meaning back. Useful if you're truly lost but absolutely 100% not useful as the global default.
Also also, what the hell do we do with years (decades?) of muscle-memory? Pretty much everyone else still uses the old behavior too so if you're cross-platform (or use only some stuff that is GTK3) that muscle memory isn't going away.
Also also also, why the shitting fuck was #3 not the new default behavior (or why isn't the old default the new default for that matter). Why isn't this only-sometimes-useful recursive search bullshit hidden behind some non-intuitive undiscoverable hotkey?
This mirrors my experience. I had been using Ubuntu MATE for a few years without any issues, 30-40 days of uptime with no hiccups. Switched to Fedora to just try it out and it's really iffy. GNOME shell hogs memory and CPU for god knows what reason, I have a mid range Intel CPU + 32GB of RAM and it still lags heavily after the system has been up for more than 5-6 hours. I am stuck with this until my current gig is finished, will be moving back to MATE as soon as possible.
It's quite a challenge to find a GPU that could run GNOME smoothly. I remember that few years ago there was a flag that magically fixed the issue (at least on Intel iGPU), but they removed in one update. Then I switched to KDE and turned out that it wasn't the integrated graphics that was bad, but GNOME.
I wonder what's wrong. There are only like a few simple animations in GNOME. C'mon, I could run Compiz smoothly on some old GeForce FX with more flashy effects enabled.
I ditched GNOME in 2015 for XFCE and haven't looked back. Their attitude is pompous and atrocious. Send them to the bins of history where they belong.
Fck GNOME devs coming straight from tha underground
A young hacker got it bad cos he's out
of other FOSS choices so devs think
They have the authority to break their reverse dependencies
Fck that shit, cause I ain't the one
For a brainwashed developer to be lecturing on
"If you don't like it, just don't upgrade"
what and use unsupported software with no security updates?
Fcking with me cos I'm not an average user
So I gotta put up with the preferences of pretentious designers
Rearranging my workflow, oversimplifying their product
Thinking every user is a fcking dumb idiot
You'd rather see, me wasting time
Than take responsibility for your poisonous party line.
Pwn a GNOME dev with an 0-day
and when I'm finished, fck with GTK
to pad a hundred pixels inside every border
yeah enjoy your own fcking bread and water!
I don't know if they NSA
Slowing hackers down, and wasting screen space
And on the other hand, without FOSS they can't get jobs
Cause they just failed at trying to be Steve Jobs.
Dumbing down the ecosystem, training user ignorance,
Spitting on those who built our community in the first place!
Anonymous will rewrite
Every application with a GNOME design
Just cause I think more mathematically
Punk designers are afraid of me!
HUH, a young hacker on the warpath
And when I'm finished, they'll wish they'd merged my patch
when they had a chance, but now it's too late
Yo J, GNOME's been replaced.
Example of scene one
[GNOME Dev] Pull up your goddamn debugger right now!
[Hacker] Aww shit, now what the fuck they changing their API for?
[GNOME Dev] Cause I feel like it! Now sit the fuck down for 16 hours and patch yo fucking software
[Hacker] Man, fuck this shit
[GNOME Dev] Aight smartass, I'm breaking yo entire desktop!
I guess I'm in that minority of people that left me when it went through the boondoggle of the early super broken 4.x releases, and started using gnome 3. Gnome 3 is distraction free to me. I don't even notice it most days.
There's a few forks and there's always elementary if you want to pay for to truely support folks.
59 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 136 ms ] threadDoes anyone know a decent counterpoint to this? Or an argument why Gnome is being reasonable?
Do you by chance know of an article that documents that? I remember seeing one back then that compiled discussions with gnome developers from multiple sources showing that, but I've lost it since then.
This summarizes the problem quite well, not only that GNOME apps are often broken outside GNOME, but if you try to run non-GNOME app on GNOME (even Gtk based) you might get broken apps because system tray (AppIndicator) isn't there or some other random bs where the functionality is removed for the sake of making users frustrated. This is somewhat similar to deletionist culture of wikipedia, delete delete delete. Basically work done outside of GNOME junta isn't valued and even if accepted might be removed in the next release.
The worst part is that despite all this, a GNOME Foundation community manager even lied about the whole thing [1], claiming that MPV never even contacted GNOME before dropping support. He also talked about how the lack of cooperation was hurting the FOSS community [2], even though many app developers including MPV did in fact share their concerns on GNOME's gitlab issue tracker [3][4] and it was GNOME maintainers that chose to ignore them.
I've been using the GNOME for quite some time, but it's time for me to switch. Some applications didn't look quite right recently, and now I know the reason why.
[1]: https://old.reddit.com/r/gnome/comments/hn1s3r/mpv_is_not_an...
[2]: https://old.reddit.com/r/gnome/comments/hn1s3r/mpv_is_not_an...
[3]: https://gitlab.gnome.org/wm4
[4]: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/issues/217
But as for the idle inhibiting API, there is some (slow) progress in the form of two MRs. And they weren't closed outright, some code review took place instead:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/merge_requests/2226
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/merge_requests/111
This message also looks relatively encouraging: https://old.reddit.com/r/gnome/comments/hn1s3r/mpv_is_not_an...
https://github.com/mpv-player/mpv/commit/7d11eda72e90d7aa9df...
https://github.com/mpv-player/mpv/commit/c4dc600f1f2e08f87cf...
https://github.com/mpv-player/mpv/commit/1e70e82baa9193f6f02...
Existence of locale means you essentially cannot safely use standard libc string functions in library code or in threaded software, particularly when interacting with a file format where stuff like number formatting is normative.
The fixes are really pretty incomplete and the result is people ending up having to ship their own implementations of these functions ... which interacts poorly with all the effort going in to harden string functions because they're a constant source of vulnerabilities.
The situation for libraries that call libraries where the middle library really needs to get things right and the called library can be more YOLO about it is ... pretty absurd.
All C standards since C99 have been ugly mishmashes of C++ features and bad ideas, one after another. What everyone was clearly asking them was to just copy-paste stuff from POSIX, and instead they came up with stupid nonsense like VLA or things nobody uses, like the [static N] syntax for arrays. I also still find absurd someone thought it was a good idea to add stuff as critical as threads.h without asking implementers first if they liked it (fun fact no one did).
What I think is a massive indicator of how much disconnected they are from reality is the "memory safe string handling" they added in C11 with those crappy *_s functions, which a. were just annoyingly slightly different from what POSIX and Win32 had and b. used a totally lunatic error reporting system based on callbacks and `set_constraint_handler_s()` - because obviously when a call to memset_s() fails I totally want a random function to run, for what for I still don't understand after 9 years. People just wanted the BSD's _l functions, and they gave them a memcpy() that called a random callback. No wonder C2X just wants to quietly pretend these abominations nobody ever implemented never happened.
What no one has ever had enough guts to admit is that 1. C strings, i.e. null-terminated strings, were a terrible mistake and 2. that C badly needs a new string library, or at least something that people can use without risking leaking their whole address space by accident.
Use absolutely no strings. :)
But right. :)
I'll definitely be borrowing that at some point.
https://www.reveddit.com/r/linux/comments/hnoksv/mpv_devs_co...
Original
https://old.reddit.com/r/gnome/comments/hn1s3r/mpv_is_not_an...
https://old.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/hnoksv/mpv_devs_cons...
edit: removed posts are back https://www.reveddit.com/r/gnome/comments/hn1s3r/mpv_is_not_...
They finally managed to convert me to KDE after 20 years, so that's something.
I'm the author of https://www.reveddit.com/about/. It's a fork of removeddit that adds features like user pages and notifications when your content is removed.
https://removeddit.com/r/linux/comments/hnoksv/mpv_devs_cons...
Removing support is a passive action; you accomplish it by just doing nothing. Calling exit() is rather more on the aggressive side.
All that said, good on 'em. I got a decent chuckle.
It's more graceful than the program exiting in a bad way because you passively decided to stop support.
I've worked on projects where I have wanted to do similar things, just refuse to work on systems i know are buggy and I do not have the time to fix.
https://github.com/mpv-player/mpv/wiki/FAQ#i-use-gnome-wayla...
> Is GNOME actively sabotaging the Linux Desktop?
https://github.com/mpv-player/mpv/wiki/FAQ#Is_GNOME_actively...
I agree too. At minimum there should be a launch flag (e.g. -allowGnome) so users don't need to outright recompile the app.
GNOME 3 removed everything, feature by feature, without realising that everything was simply becoming more complicated. Having to install at least 3 extensions in order to make a desktop environment behave the way it is supposed to is asinine, and it feels like they totally forgot who their target users are.
Plus, GNOME has been deliberately hostile towards anything non-GNOME for so long now that I am surprised there aren't more people out there telling them to screw themselves. GTK+ has also been monopolised by them and it's become harder release after release to keep track to what they were doing to the point that some devs actually found rewriting everything using Qt a more productive way to spend their time.
As for gtk, they still have not merged the patch for thumbnails in the open file dialog.
I don't know a ton about it but I assume gnome-shell is where all the JS (which I gather is a huge thing in Gnome now) runs, judging from how crashy and resource-gobbling it is.
> the new KDE is surprisingly light
I had a strong aversion to KDE because I never liked how it made non-K* apps feel out-of-place, and I prefer almost none of the K* apps to other (largely GTK) alternatives, plus it used to be (talking many years ago) far heavier both in feel/performance and compile time than Gnome, but yeah, that's what I've switched to, and it performs far better. "Foreign" apps no longer feel as out-of-place as they used to and with some tweaking I don't hate the appearance.
What they've done to Gnome is so bizarre. I even kinda like the look & feel but damn, it's way too big a pig to be always-on on my machine.
Granted, Xfce has gone through a toolkit change before, but switching again would be too much of a burden.
I feel like there was a sweet spot in the mid and late 00s when there were efforts to promote cross-desktop standards (the "XDG" in those environment variables means "cross-desktop group") that made it easier to write apps that would integrate well with any environment, regardless of what toolkit you were using. But at some point in the early 10s that degenerated into GNOME ramming "standards" down people's throats and going their own way without any attempt to work with the rest of the community.
It's an interesting coincidence that systemd's rise (with similar standards-forcing and advocacy for tight coupling) was somewhat concurrent with GNOME's descent into community hostility.
This is a valid concern:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/477178/avoid-double-titlebar...
They've since added support for client-side decorations, but it arguably wasn't by choice. It definitely feels like a cat and mouse game now.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/issues/217
So they are a bad example as they went the toolkit-way, which GNOME also wants.
Gnome devs' suggestion to just use Gtk3 for this is not really equivalent, because on both Windows and macOS, the library that offers the window creation API is core part of the OS - it's technically a dependency, yes, but it's the one that nobody actually cares about. On Linux, Gtk3 is a dependency that people do care about, because it's not guaranteed to be present, and requiring it often means doubling the sheer number of packages that an app like that might need.
Gnome doesn't care, because they see themselves as a platform akin to Windows and Mac - so if you intend your app to run on Gnome, then you compile it for Gnome (and then assume that Gtk3 is always there). But, of course, this attitude amounts to saying that they don't really care about compatibility with apps for "just Linux". Which is exactly why they're getting so much pushback on this.
1. It saves tons of time.
> - why are the folders down the side random paths?
2. Same as 1.
> why is there no place to enter a path?
3. Because of 1, 2, and 4. Use ^L, when you need it.
> - why does it do a recursive search when I type in the window?
4. Same as 1.
> 4. Same as 1.
> ... saves tons of time
No. It really fucking doesn't.
How is it ever supposed to be faster to try and figure out which search result for 'index.html' is the file in the somewhat-cluttered folder I just fucking navigated to for the express purpose of opening index.html, so that I don't end up selecting another file named 'index.html' from one of the subfolders? Just jump to the goddamn file in the current folder as I type, it's so much faster, and it's what everyone who has ever used the type-while-in-a-file-dialog feature expects to happen anyway.
Also how have people not figured out that file search on your local computer kinda really sucks? The stuff you want to search for probably doesn't have a unique/meaningful file name. Folders namespace non-unique file names, and the full path then has some semantic meaning. And since humans are pretty good at semantics, we seem to be pretty good at navigating the semantic hierarchy of where we put stuff. Recursive search makes you read some inevitably tiny and low-contrast text to get the meaning back. Useful if you're truly lost but absolutely 100% not useful as the global default.
Also also, what the hell do we do with years (decades?) of muscle-memory? Pretty much everyone else still uses the old behavior too so if you're cross-platform (or use only some stuff that is GTK3) that muscle memory isn't going away.
Also also also, why the shitting fuck was #3 not the new default behavior (or why isn't the old default the new default for that matter). Why isn't this only-sometimes-useful recursive search bullshit hidden behind some non-intuitive undiscoverable hotkey?
ctrl+l is the keyboard shortcut for editing the path.
https://userbase.kde.org/Browser_Configuration/Firefox_Dialo...
KDE file dialogs for GTK+ applications: https://www.linuxsecrets.com/archlinux-wiki/wiki.archlinux.o...
I wonder what's wrong. There are only like a few simple animations in GNOME. C'mon, I could run Compiz smoothly on some old GeForce FX with more flashy effects enabled.
There's a few forks and there's always elementary if you want to pay for to truely support folks.
Unfortunately, because gnome is what most people use and what the distro defaults to other choices are inherently second class.
I happily used xmonad for years, but eventually got forced out of it due to compatibility especially once things started using wayland.
I wonder if us desktop users need a pact of the form that we'll stop using gnome completely of 51% of other users also stop using gnome. :)