Re: I apology
Toby Smithe wrote: I did not see these evil things you wrote, but I am sure everyone forgives you. Don't be so down on yourself; everything isn't awful. First of all, thanks to everybody for warm replies (I received private emails also). People were worried about me and I must say that it was the last stress, my imaginative conflict with Gnome and it is gone now. I feel like a happy kid, because it was quite a while ago when I apologized last time :) With regards to evil things... 1. I said that I am trying to be a Christian, but I was aggressive to say the least. 2. I said that my competitors are broken bicycles, but they are not. 3. My jokes had double meaning with sarcasm, nationalism and pornography (e.g. I am not an English lord, the Great John's guideline, was frightened for some reason, not only to kiss etc.). 4. I said that I do not seek leverage (i.e. don't want to play politics) but I was acting like a politician and in fact was trying to provoke people and manipulate the community into using my software. At the same time I accused you for being too political. Also, I was suggesting you a new political system. I was fooling myself that I can make Gnome better, but I was doing evil things in fact. 5. I used crazy rhetoric. For example I named Google's search as a gate into the universe, although it is just a piece of software. I formulated the Principle and a metaphor about warring commander, both looks to me like a plain madness now, i.e. they have evil meaning. 6. I used a name of God's man, Gideon, as a name of the project, but I had no rights to do that. 7. I was pretending to be a visionary that may cure your problems, although I myself needed to be cured in the first place. In my letter I said that I have no authority and knowledge to point Gnome new directions, but I was doing exactly that thing. 8. In my letter I presented an ideal vision where I said we live in the ideal world that have no troubles, although I knew that the Bible clearly states that heaven on Earth is only possible via the Kingdom of God (human beings cannot create heaven themselves without God). 9. Although I was pretending to be a Christian, I was appealing to the humankind's philosophies and wisdom. The true Christianity is based only on God's wisdom and the Bible, his Word. 10. I posted a troll about International Space Station. In that thread I was accusing Gnome and gtkmm for things that are almost nothing when compared with my attitude. I used ISS and university rhetoric as an example of how people of different nationalities may unite and again didn't say anything about the Kingdom of Jehovah God which, as the Bible promises, will be the kingdom for all nations with Jesus Christ as a King: And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite (Daniel 2:44) http://www.watchtower.org/e/bible/da/chapter_002.htm#bk44 And to him there were given rulership and dignity and kingdom, that the peoples, national groups and languages should all serve even him. His rulership is an indefinitely lasting rulership that will not pass away, and his kingdom one that will not be brought to ruin. (Daniel 7:14) http://www.watchtower.org/e/bible/da/chapter_007.htm#bk14 Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them, and they will be his peoples. And God himself will be with them. And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away. (Revelation 21:3,4) http://www.watchtower.org/e/bible/re/chapter_021.htm#bk3 I recently was studying the Bible with Jehovah's Witnesses, they give full and precise explanation of all Bible teachings. And some time ago when I had especially hard times with the disorder and was ready to die, studying the Bible and God's promises written there were giving me the reason to live. Because of those studies I now was able to recognize my mistakes and ask for forgiveness. http://www.watchtower.org ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
I apology
I want to apology about what I said recently on this list. I feel very bad about that, and please read why that happened. This is off topic for this list, but please don't laugh, I need to be listened. I am not a native speaker, and in this explanation my phrases may again sound strange... I'll try to be concise. In 2003, being 7 years in a deep depression (caused by life conditions, unanswered love and failed attempt to immigrate to the USA due to September 11), I decided to switch my ordinary software job and become a game developer in a hope that this change will somehow cure me. I participated in the development of a PS2 title (I was responsible for game physics, parts of animation and BSP collision detection). In parallel with software development I was working on a scenario for a future title, it was a naval drama about a young British whaler (I have some writing skills). Unfortunately the amount of new job not cured me as I foolishly hoped, instead, after one year it pushed me into a more mental exhaustion. Being in this state, an accident happened with me where I experienced life threat and after that I gained a so called Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-traumatic_stress_disorder I left gamedev job (I was not able to work in office anymore). I had some savings, so I just was sitting at home waiting for disorder to dissipate. This disorder was marked by a strong anxiety and flashbacks; for several months day and night I was felling like I may die at every minute. I was afraid to call for a doctor in a fear to be taken into a hospital and go crazy because of an additional stress. As a measure to overcome painful flashbacks and draw my attention to something else I started development of a GUI designer in November 2004 and published it about year later when it was finished. I was not ready for mostly negative feedback (or may be I was imagine things) and at this point I should just give up, but I decided to prove that I am right and may be helpful for foss, not fully realizing my health conditions and that my writing skills may be depressing to other people. Next year I was polishing designer and gathering aggression until it all felled here as a Contribution thread and other my messages. Please forgive me for that evil things I was saying here. I was blinded by false beliefs that I bring light, but it was almost all just crazy rhetoric and fantasies of an ill and self-loving person. /Maxim Udushlivy P.S. I renamed designer project (http://crow-designer.sf.net; a crow, because they are tool makers) and will leave it... If somebody is interested to take over, please contact me or use project mailing list. Also, I am ready to give all project copyrights to Gnome Foundation. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: International Space Station Images
Federico Mena Quintero wrote: There is no conspiracy. Really. [...] You may feel indignant at the current wording of the FAQ, but it was not written that way to annoy you. You are just sensitive to wording. It's like when Arnold Schoenberg got sensitive that some poor musical chords were less likely to be used than others, and so he destroyed harmony altogether. 1. State openly that gtkmm website contains subtle (unintentional?) lies. (This was the most important for me personally.) Definitely unintentional. No more of a lie than saying the sky is blue in Mexico City. Everyone knows intuitively that the sky is supposed to be blue, even though it looks kind of brownish when you look out the window. I said that this is important to me personally, but I am not caring about myself. I am not sensitive to wording, what I am sensitive to are subtle lies that cause a domino effect of spreading misconceptions (sample: http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/928). The sky is blue is a poetry, but gtkmm is a toolkit is something different. This is an unfair advertisement. Or may be Murray is a poet? Anyway, this case is closed. 2. Propose a position of a Moderator. This could automatically increase signal/noise ratio of mailing lists; debates won't be endless; people would afraid to lie; less politics and more activity; Gnome will be more comfortable for people from Eastern Europe and Asia (some if not all eastern cultures are not compatible with meritocracy!) [...] Making GNOME's customs more palatable to non-Western cultures is a *very* interesting problem, and one that we should definitely solve. Someone should start polling Eastern free software hackers into why they may feel that GNOME doesn't feel welcoming to them. Would you like to start such an investigation? [There *is* prior work in trying to answer that question... Alan Cox and others will be able to inform you.] I was thinking recently about similar subject: why there are more programmers from Eastern Europe in FreeBSD community then in Linux and Gnome. Here are some considerations that may be useful. Every community (project) has its subculture, which means that there is an entrance barrier for every newcomer. Overcoming that barrier requires from the newcomer to change his mentality to some extent. The question is whether Gnome's barrier requires too much from non-Western people. I see two aspects here: goals and means. A truly international project must have national-independent goals and means. Perhaps the best example is the International Space Station. Its goals are science and technology while means are mutual trust and partnership. In order to participate in ISS nobody needs to change, no barrier at all, because science and trust are international. If you want Gnome to become more appealing to Eastern Europe, compare Gnome with FreeBSD which does not participate in free vs commercial wars, has a sensible community structure, pursues clear goals, has Computer Science (not income) as a muse and is not driven by corporate interests. In short, FreeBSD is university, opened and transparent to everybody. All BSD projects, like universities, very often share technology - this cannot be said about desktops. 5. Formulate the Gideon Principle and propose it as a cornerstone for Gnome HIG and certification. What is the Gideon Principle? The third section: start with So here is that principle, skip a reply from Calum Benson and below is an explanation of that principle in a form of a metaphor: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-August/msg00275.html 6. Discuss the possibility of contribution of Gideon to Gnome since Gnome hosts GTK+. (I admit that I sounded frivolous on the Contribution thread, but that's because I was not sure that such contribution could happen and is fully sensible.) I'm sure that Gideon has a ton of interesting ideas and code that should be reused. Right now we have way too many GUI designers: Glade-2, Glade-3, Gazpacho, Stetic, Gideon, and probably others. Someone needs to take the initiative to stop reinventing this particular wheel, and see what is common across all of those GUI designers. Is it that they allow integration with IDEs? Is it the XML descriptions? Is it the mechanisms for plugging in new widget types? Etc. The task of integrating libglade into GTK+ got postponed from GTK+ 2.10, because no one finished the work. That's the library side of things, but we also need the actual GUI designer and the integration with the IDEs. That's the initiative that someone needs to take to avoid so much reinvention. Contribution of Gideon is revoked. 7. Propose to narrow Gnome by ideology (this is a short formulation of an implementation style - not a HIG, but something like a motto: Simple interface, great functionality, coherent behavior) (In fact that's my motto
Re: International Space Station Images
Murray Cumming wrote: [snip] A fight because bullsh*t is a cancer. For another example check this review that puts gtkmm not only above other wrappers but almost on one level with GTK+ itself: http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/928 This article is a direct result of gtkmm presentation that tries to expose that wrapper as a savior by lowering GTK+. This cancer is being spread for years and the campaign has a deafening success, I myself was hypnotized once. [snip] This is so vague that it's difficult to respond. I assume that you object to gtkmm developers suggesting that people use gtkmm instead of GTK+ to developer applications. So I'll note that - The GTK+ developers recommend that people use language bindings to develop applications. They say it's easier. - gtkmm is meant for people who like C++. It's obviously better than GTK+ for C++ coders. So I'm not sure what the charges against me are. To your other points: People (me included) don't seem to understand what you are suggesting or the implications of it, and are offended by their understanding so far. When that happens it's best to calmly think again about how you are presenting it. If people still don't agree with you then that's life. We all have different opinions and we can't all fight about them. Some people call that politics, but it's just getting things done. Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com Murray, I was thinking once that you present gtkmm as something superior to GTK+ on purpose, but recently I changed my opinion. Your desire to expose gtkmm in the most advantageous fashion is understandable. But how can you explain this phrase from gtkmm website: gtkmm is a GUI toolkit and nothing more, and it strives to be the best C++ GUI toolkit? There are also strange things in gtkmm FAQ, for example why use gtkmm instead of GTK+ - note the word instead. If that all was said unconsciously, may be it's time to make gtkmm more loyal to GTK+? My negative attitude towards gtkmm was increased also after somebody started a (paid?) google ad campaign promoting a gtkmm tutorial chapter about Glade. Regarding my proposals... I said that I want to retire from free software (I have a different mentality), so I hope nobody could accuse me that I seek selfish gains here. I gathered some knowledge during development of Gideon and I wanted to share it with the Gnome community. Oliver Stone said recently that he criticizes America because he loves it. My points are sharp, here is a full list of what I wanted to say (just to *say* and may be discuss, not to push): 1. State openly that gtkmm website contains subtle (unintentional?) lies. (This was the most important for me personally.) 2. Propose a position of a Moderator. This could automatically increase signal/noise ratio of mailing lists; debates won't be endless; people would afraid to lie; less politics and more activity; Gnome will be more comfortable for people from Eastern Europe and Asia (some if not all eastern cultures are not compatible with meritocracy!) 3. Show the benefits of a split of Gnome and GTK+: this eliminates technology and ideology mixture, so both projects could improve faster since they have different goals. 4. Propose Gnome certification (originally I was thinking about it as a replacement to the HIG, but I was shown that the HIG is needed, so it is a complement now). 5. Formulate the Gideon Principle and propose it as a cornerstone for Gnome HIG and certification. 6. Discuss the possibility of contribution of Gideon to Gnome since Gnome hosts GTK+. (I admit that I sounded frivolous on the Contribution thread, but that's because I was not sure that such contribution could happen and is fully sensible.) 7. Propose to narrow Gnome by ideology (this is a short formulation of an implementation style - not a HIG, but something like a motto: Simple interface, great functionality, coherent behavior) (In fact that's my motto that I use when I develop GUI applications. It is a user-understandable reformulation of the Gideon Principle) Hmm... may be something else I can't recall now. Some of these points raised *after* I made my first post here. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: International Space Station Images
Murray Cumming wrote: You'll have to be more clear. Enough was said, this is not a trial and we have no a judge. 1. State openly that gtkmm website contains subtle (unintentional?) lies. (This was the most important for me personally.) Enough. This is completely unhinged and I won't reply any more. An active moderator (such as you suggest below) would have banned you by now. I'm sorry that you seem so dissatisfied, but I don't understand what caused it. I haven't used Gideon (I haven't needed to) but the screenshots suggest that you are a talented and dedicated software developer who could benefit any community. But not like this. Understand now why I want a moderator in the first place? Yes, Murray, a normal moderator will not ban me: he will just rename gtkmm to gtk+-c++ which effectively dissipates all gtkmm mesmerism. Why not to admit mistakes and do the renaming yourself or at least fix controversial things in gtkmm presentation and documentation? Our cold war that you started will have a first anniversary soon, may be enough? Because of this war I have a negative opinion about Gnome community since friends of my foe cannot be my friends. This results in my anti-social behavior on this list which I cannot resist although I have good intentions. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: International Space Station Images
Jeff Waugh wrote: quote who=Maxim Udushlivy Why not to admit mistakes and do the renaming yourself or at least fix controversial things in gtkmm presentation and documentation? There's nothing controversial there, and nothing to fix. There is no war, and we have no idea what you're going on about. - Jeff Thanks, Jeff I'm closing all questions. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
International Space Station Images
The International Space Station (ISS) is a manned research space facility that is being assembled in orbit around the Earth. It is a joint project between five space agencies: the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA, United States), the Russian Federal Space Agency (RKA, Russian Federation), the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA, Japan), the Canadian Space Agency (CSA, Canada) and the European Space Agency (ESA, Europe) ISS photographed following separation from the Space Shuttle Atlantis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:STS-115_ISS_after_undocking.jpg Zarya and Node 1 in 1999: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ISS_June_1999.jpg The nadir window in the Destiny lab: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Helms.window.jpg Cosmonaut Sergei Krikalev inside the Zvezda Service Module: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:NASA-Krikalev-inside-ISS.jpg Astronaut Stephen K. Robinson anchored to a foot restraint on the ISS’s Canadarm2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:STS-114_Steve_Robinson_on_Canadarm2.jpg Astronaut Reilly in Quest Airlock: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Reilly.in.quest.jpg Flight Engineer Helms in Node 1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Helms.node1.jpg The Leonardo Multi Purpose Logistics Module: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mplm_in_shuttle.jpg The Zarya module: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Interior_of_Zarya_ISS_mudule.jpg (From the past) The American Space Shuttle Atlantis docked to the Russian Mir Space Station: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Atlantis_Docked_to_Mir.jpg About ISS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: International Space Station Images
Maxim Udushlivy wrote: Jeff Waugh wrote: quote who=Maxim Udushlivy The International Space Station (ISS) is a manned research space facility that is being assembled in orbit around the Earth. Maxim, This is not on topic for this list. Thanks, - Jeff That was done on purpose due to a strange list inactivity. I am still hoping to get your replies to other my messages. Also I am ready to unsubscribe without feeling insulted, just give me a hint (-; Jeff, we are not interested in your proposals right now is also a good reply. I do not insist on anything, really. I admit that I used such pesky words as collapse and political union, but I was talking mostly like a journalist who wants to raise questions and start a discussion - that was not a verdict. I bet you know that those journalists do trolling exactly for that purpose sometimes (-; Again, I do not insist on anything, but the silence may be interpreted not only as a lack of interest but also as a confusion which makes me feel guilty as if I am not able to express my thoughts in an understandable manner. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: International Space Station Images
Elijah Newren wrote: On 9/19/06, Maxim Udushlivy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That was done on purpose due to a strange list inactivity. I am still So you intentionally wasted everyone's time? You're right[1], we do need stronger list moderation. Please don't do that again. hoping to get your replies to other my messages. Also I am ready to unsubscribe without feeling insulted, just give me a hint (-; Alright, if you just need a response... Let me first start by saying, thank you for being willing to contribute Gideon and GuiLoader to Gnome[2]. It looks like a very positive offer, though it will take a while to evaluate to determine whether to mark it part of core Gnome or part of the bigger umbrella (like AbiWord or GIMP or something). That it will take a while to evaluate is not unique to your module, rather, it's true of all module proposals. Now, I'll try to explain why you might have found people didn't want to respond to many of your emails. I hope I don't come across as offensive. You might note that people likely started ignoring your emails when you demonstrated a lack of understanding of several ideals of the community[3]. That you also decided that you needed to fix Gnome probably didn't help. (You guys are doing it all wrong often doesn't come across well[4]) I found it somewhat surprising that you complained about too much bureaucracy and politics[5] and would prefer getting work done, yet just about all I could see you getting involved with was bureaucracy and politics. Many, just wanting to get work done, decided to do work rather than get caught up spending all their time emailing. I hope that helps, Elijah [1] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-September/msg00228.html [2] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-August/msg00241.html [3] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-August/msg00258.html [4] I'm not saying that's how you meant it to come across. In fact, I'm convinced you didn't mean it that way. However, it's nearly impossible to come across any other way when you're new. Political changes typically require well known people in the community to stand up and say hey guys; here's where I think we have a problem...and here's some ways we might fix it. Even with the latter, though, it can be exceptionally difficult. Look at Havoc's posts over the last year about target audience. He has a lot of clout, and I think you'll find just about everyone agrees with him that we need to pick a target audience. That doesn't mean it's a simple problem or easy to do. [5] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-August/msg00272.html Thanks, Elijah for the reply: it is a bit harsh but I like honesty and hate political correctness. Now I see that as a newcomer I have a little chance to be heard. But that's my pesky personality: I think that sensible things are valuable even in the mouth of a stranger. Looks like Gnome tradition is different and I am not questioning it. You described my attitude as You guys are doing it all wrong and this is true, I have it. Too much confusion is floating around Gnome. I already mentioned a couple of points earlier, and here I will add yet another about GTK+. I think it is obvious that Gnome owes to GTK+ its very existence. How can you explain this page: http://live.gnome.org/GnomeArchitecture/Overview Scroll down to Near future - the 2.16 platform and try to find GTK+ on the diagram. There is something called UI Library Project Ridely under Gnome Platform section. At the same time Gnome Bindings lists GTK+ wrappers using their full names. It seems to me that Gnome is digging a grave for GTK+. What attitude can you expect from me now? Also you said that I myself was involved in bureaucracy and politics. No, I wasn't. I don't understand many things about Free Desktops and before Gideon can be contributed (if ever) I think I also have rights to evaluate Gnome for the subject of being a comfortable place for me personally. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: International Space Station Images
Richard Hughes wrote: On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 21:38 +0400, Maxim Udushlivy wrote: Thanks, Elijah for the reply: it is a bit harsh Nope, I think Elijah was 100% correct. Richard. That was a compliment, no need to protect Elijah. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: International Space Station Images
Emmanuele Bassi wrote: So, the attitude we can expect from a person whom wants to contribute something to GNOME in terms of organisation and policies is to try and understand the current organisation, policies and goals; and only after that, proposing to change something (complete with a nice road map and rationales for every point). Ciao, Emmanuele. Hi, thanks for directions. :-) My main suggestion is a position of a Gnome Moderator. It's difficult to prove his importance with a roadmap since it is only possible to appeal to a common sense and imagination: graphs won't help. By the way, here is a good description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forum_moderator My next point is that Gnome and GTK+ should part their ways (like Qt and KDE which are separate entities). I tried to explain rationales in my letter: http://www.mail-archive.com/desktop-devel-list@gnome.org/msg06771.html ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: International Space Station Images
Elijah Newren wrote: Scroll down to Near future - the 2.16 platform and try to find GTK+ on the diagram. There is something called UI Library Project Ridely under Gnome Platform section. At the same time Gnome Bindings lists GTK+ wrappers using their full names. It seems to me that Gnome is digging a grave for GTK+. What attitude can you expect from me now? It almost seems like you're looking for a fight. Why? What's the point in grabbing some obscure page written by a single person (append ?action=info to the url to see the list of changes and who made them), trying to find something that you might be able to construe as showing devious intent (rather than asking the author of the page what he actually intended; I strongly doubt Nickolay had any such intentions), and then ascribing that position to all of Gnome to boot? And, as far as I can tell, you have done so without asking any GTK+ developers whether they feel this way (I'm pretty certain they'd say the opposite, knowing several of them and having made a couple small contributions myself). Your claim that Gnome is trying to dig a grave for GTK+ is preposterous, to say the least. A fight because bullsh*t is a cancer. For another example check this review that puts gtkmm not only above other wrappers but almost on one level with GTK+ itself: http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/928 This article is a direct result of gtkmm presentation that tries to expose that wrapper as a savior by lowering GTK+. This cancer is being spread for years and the campaign has a deafening success, I myself was hypnotized once. Also you said that I myself was involved in bureaucracy and politics. No, I wasn't. In the last three weeks or so, you proposed that the project should create a different leadership structure[1], that we should abandon free/open source software as ideals[2], and that the HIG should be discarded (I disagree with HIG existence[3]). How exactly is that not spending your time on bureaucracy and politics? [1] - I proposed a change in a leadership but I was not proposing myself as a leader. And this is not even a change in a leadership, but an extension: additional position above current structures, a Moderator [2] - I don't understand how does this abandon foss ideals. [3] - I changed my opinion later (the second paragraph): http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-August/msg00275.html [1] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-September/msg00228.html [2] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-August/msg00258.html [3] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-August/msg00269.html ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Getting to Topaz (Was Re: getting on a longer release cycled)
BJörn Lindqvist wrote: I think you are 100% right and that it is important for GNOME to narrow its focus. For example, if GNOME limited its focus to computers with 256 MB of RAM, then... I was proposing to narrow Gnome by ideology (implementation style), Havok - by desktop tasks (implementation scope), you - by hardware requirements (implementation details). What is more viable? And it is not just the memory requirements for GNOME that needs to be decided. I agree that choosing a specific target niche would be very useful. Problem is, how are you going to do it? GNOME doesn't have a BFDL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BFDL) so WHO would decide what the target niche is? Many of the most successful free software projects (Linux and Python for example) have a BFDL, that person has a clear vision about how they want their product to be. Everyone else has just to accept that vision or leave the project. GNOME is different in that regard, different developers have different visions and when they clash, big debates erupt on this mailing list. Debates that really doesn't solve the problems and doesn't find a common ground... There is an interesting observation on how laws are being developed in the USA: they are formulations of common practices. I.e. those laws do not try to change behavior of people, instead they enforce something that already exists and works. That's why I propose with a pure conscience a position of Gnome Moderator (who is not a Dictator but an anti-crisis manager). It is very common for an on-line community to have a moderator. With a moderator endless debates would be impossible since there will be a man to whom you could prove that your practices (of vision of practices of others) are efficient and deserves to become a law. Currently people just express their opinions without any effect - a boiling water inside a teapot that could otherwise become a steam engine. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Getting to Topaz (Was Re: getting on a longer release cycled)
Maxim Udushlivy wrote: BJörn Lindqvist wrote: I think you are 100% right and that it is important for GNOME to narrow its focus. For example, if GNOME limited its focus to computers with 256 MB of RAM, then... I was proposing to narrow Gnome by ideology (implementation style), Havok - by desktop tasks (implementation scope), you - by hardware requirements (implementation details). What is more viable? Additional point: - narrowing by scope tells people *what* things to do: the freedom is sacrificed (impossible for Gnome?) - narrowing by style tells people *how* to do things: people are educated (if the style is good) And it is not just the memory requirements for GNOME that needs to be decided. I agree that choosing a specific target niche would be very useful. Problem is, how are you going to do it? GNOME doesn't have a BFDL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BFDL) so WHO would decide what the target niche is? Many of the most successful free software projects (Linux and Python for example) have a BFDL, that person has a clear vision about how they want their product to be. Everyone else has just to accept that vision or leave the project. GNOME is different in that regard, different developers have different visions and when they clash, big debates erupt on this mailing list. Debates that really doesn't solve the problems and doesn't find a common ground... There is an interesting observation on how laws are being developed in the USA: they are formulations of common practices. I.e. those laws do not try to change behavior of people, instead they enforce something that already exists and works. That's why I propose with a pure conscience a position of Gnome Moderator (who is not a Dictator but an anti-crisis manager). It is very common for an on-line community to have a moderator. With a moderator endless debates would be impossible since there will be a man to whom you could prove that your practices (of vision of practices of others) Typo: ...(*or* vision of practices of others)... are efficient and deserves to become a law. Currently people just express their opinions without any effect - a boiling water inside a teapot that could otherwise become a steam engine. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Getting to Topaz (Was Re: getting on a longer release cycled)
Shaun McCance wrote: On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 00:33 +0400, Maxim Udushlivy wrote: Havoc Pennington wrote: I think the best shot at this would be to gather a small group that agrees on some audience they want to try and do stuff for, and just start doing it; I'm not sure how the overall GNOME boat can be turned up front, it's probably not possible. The small group would have to be prepared for potentially large divergence from the existing gnome-panel/nautilus/etc. desktop codebase - they would need to be open to doing very different things either instead or in addition, if that made sense to provide the benefits to the audience. ...gather a small group - this reminds the infamous lack-of-leadership Gnome problem (at least from the outsider perspective) I was once lurking around planet.gnome.org and there was an interesting accident. One guy said about Israel that it is evil and another (Jeff Waugh?) was trying to moderate him. I'm going off-topic for the list, but I don't want any misinformation to spread. I don't remember who it was that wanted political opinion silenced on the planet, but it absolutely was not Jeff. The whole idea of the blog aggregator (and it was pretty much all his idea) is to let people see the personal lives of the people who make Gnome work. -- Shaun May be was trying sounds a bit negative, but I completely support Jeff reply regardless of who asked him to do that. Many people read planet.gnome; it's a public place, not a private home page. There is a good saying: where the freedom of another person starts, mine ends. Political propaganda limits freedom of the mind (there is a choice to completely ignore planet.gnome of course). ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Getting to Topaz (Was Re: getting on a longer release cycled)
Zaheer Merali wrote: On 9/11/06, Maxim Udushlivy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was once lurking around planet.gnome.org and there was an interesting accident. One guy said about Israel that it is evil and another (Jeff Waugh?) was trying to moderate him. I blogged about the Israel issue and Jeff did not try to moderate me. He blogged saying maybe I went too far in my blog entry, though he blogged after my apology blog entry. Jeff, as far as I can tell, does not want to moderate Planet Gnome as Planet GNOME is a window into the world, work and lives of GNOME hackers and contributors. Zaheer Zaheer, I do not think that you said something horrible and unbearable. I used that event as an example of possible useful moderation that could be done on the project level in other areas. Whether to moderate planet.gnome or not is not my business, although I think since it is a public place there should be a couple of obvious rules. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Getting to Topaz (Was Re: getting on a longer release cycled)
Ed Mack wrote: Gnome Sheriff must be elected by some formal procedure (better by democratic voting). His main responsibility - moderate mailing lists from bullshit, destroy crazy ideas before they infect people, protect project ideology, etc. A democracy arises because allowing everyone a say in running the country is not feasible. We already have structures where everybody can voice opinion, and if you think you can do something better you are free to patch/fork anyone elses code (as a programming domain example). There are opinions that those structures do not influence much. I do not think I can do better, I just see that Gnome appears to be lost a bit and I was trying to suggest a new position that may fix a leadership problem, a Gnome Moderator (or Sheriff if you are not against humor). It seems to me that Jeff Waugh is doing something similar to moderation - then why not to create an official position, give more rights (as well as responsibilities) to it and elect a man for a period? Lets not limit ourselves to the non-digital world for the sake of an organisation diagram. Developers are not digital. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Getting to Topaz (Was Re: getting on a longer release cycled)
Travis Watkins wrote: On 9/12/06, Ed Mack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A democracy arises because allowing everyone a say in running the country is not feasible. We already have structures where everybody can voice opinion, and if you think you can do something better you are free to patch/fork anyone elses code (as a programming domain example). Technically, a democracy is everyone having a say in running the country, you're thinking of a republic. I do agree that we don't need a Sheriff or any such thing. People need to stop asking for permission to do things and just start doing them. If someone doesn't like the work you're doing they then have to a) help you fix it, b) make something that works better, or c) live with it. Ahem... Afraid of a sheriff? Why? (-; There is no freedom without rules. Without rules there is anarchy, chaos, nonexistence. Our visible universe is built around strict physical laws, such as gravity. Only due to those laws we could enjoy freedom: to walk, to run, to speak, to drink, to kiss (and not only to kiss!), to eat, to read, etc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Getting to Topaz (Was Re: getting on a longer release cycled)
Havoc Pennington wrote: Maxim Udushlivy wrote: I remember somebody compared Gnome with a car. But the desktop is an environment, so it is not a car, it is a parking. The same goes about a hammer: desktop environment is a collection of tools. Different tasks require different collections. The items that you mentioned may fit very well into one desktop ideology (e.g. simplicity) as several profiles. It is possible to make a parallel with Eclipse IDE which has profiles (they call them perspectives). There are profiles for Java source code editing, SVN browsing, debugging, etc. Every profile has its own layout and a set of opened sub-windows (hammers). All profiles are Eclipse-style. Desktops have so-called workspaces (never used them), may be they could be extended into task-oriented profiles?! The Eclipse platform is a great example really, let's contrast it with GNOME. First, there's an Eclipse rich client platform which is roughly on the level of gtk/dbus/gconf/gnome-vfs type stuff, i.e. it's libraries. On top of that there are at least two large projects. One is the Eclipse IDE, which is already narrowed in scope to software developers; it can make some UI decisions intended for that audience in a global way. Inside the Eclipse IDE, there are task or audience oriented perspectives and plugins for different kinds of software developers. Another large project is IBM Workplace, which is (in some sense) a desktop. However, it's a desktop very specifically for corporate office workers. And IBM does not leave it at that, they tune the desktop for very specific vertical markets. So here's an example that Google turned up (everyone will have to look past all the corporate buzzword speak): http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/tividd/software/saleskits/H219009P42370K84/KEY_36.html click on tech specs on the right, and look at slide 2 in the powerpoint deck. Slide 1 is the title slide. So the first slide with content is labeled value proposition and that slide has a table. The first two rows in the table are: For: Chief Operating Officer, Chief Information Officer, Procurement Team Who needs: Enhanced collaboration across the organization and with OEMs, Streamlined service and parts operations, and more efficient buying and procurement processes Made clear just before that in the slide is that this is specifically for the automotive industry. Now, I don't think this is the _best_ example: - it's all a bit too market segment instead of ethnography/persona - the Eclipse UI does feel a little clunky imo, like it's wedging everything into a Grand Unified Platform whether it wants to fit or not Still, the broadest, most general-purpose description of IBM Workplace is still tightly focused on corporate office workers with IT staff (GNOME has not narrowed down to that) and the broadest, most general-purpose description of the Eclipse IDE is that it's for developers (GNOME has not narrowed down to that either). Havoc I used Eclipse IDE just as an example of perspective (profile) switching. Like Eclipse, Gnome may have different perspectives: one for developers, another for internet browsing and email, third for office-related tasks, etc. These perspectives form *one* desktop by means of several workspaces, one workspace for each perspective. I wanted to say that there is no need to narrow Gnome to only one audience/task/perspective. Of course Gnome must target certain category of users, but that should not be done by limiting the whole Gnome to a some subset of all possible desktop tasks. Desktop is a general-purpose environment and Gnome should find its users by promoting certain ideology (for example UI simplicity, extended functionality and minimal configuration effort). ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
The Lower Desktop, Upper Desktops
*The Lower Desktop, Upper Desktops* (a letter to the Gnome community, in a poor English) It was about two years while I was more or less in touch with Gnome, and I must say that no other large free software project delivers so much confusion to an outsider. And since Gnome has always been my favourive desktop, I feel obligatory to share with the Gnome community my thoughts that were inspired by some recent posts on d-d-l. Many users and developers agree that Free Desktops have some deep yet obscure problems. Sometimes they call a freedom of desktop choice with a depressed “pick up your poison” phrase. Although everybody agree that troubles exist, a quick look at Gnome 3.0 plans reveals that there is no clear formulation of those troubles, not to say about solutions to them. I have no necessary experience neither authority to point Gnome new directions, instead I want to continue a somewhat radical “rehash” of certain Free Desktop traditions. This process is already going on with the help of freedesktop.org, and the noble purpose of this message is an attempt to fasten it. The Ideal Vision The ideal vision is a dream... We live in the ideal world that has no troubles. We have an invincible free kernel and a number of sublime desktops that can satisfy every user on the planet. Every such a desktop represent some ideology: one – configurability, another – simplicity, third – lighweightness. All desktops are built on top of a pool of common technologies. It's better to split desktop user-base into two categories: developers and ordinary users. Let's call desktop technologies a “Lower Desktop” and desktops for users – “Upper Desktops”. The Lower Desktop has everything for developers to create an Upper Desktop of their choice. The Lower Desktop is a technology, it has no ideology. An Upper Desktop is an ideology, it has no technology. What parts do the Lower Desktop and Upper Desktops consist of? The Lower Desktop: windowing system, configuration database, MIME database, virtual file-system, IPC, component technology, file formats, language run-times, etc. Toolkits are also here. A toolkit is a Lower Desktop abstraction that makes multi-platform (multi-desktop) development possible. A toolkit provides not only desktop abstractions (widgets and a browser window) but kernel abstractions also (threading, fast low-level I/O). Toolkits use the same look-and-feel engine. An Upper Desktop targets certain user audience by providing user-visible applications that meat well-defined criterion. The range of those applications is limited only by Upper Desktop's ideology: from panels, applets and basic set of utilities to office suites, browsers and advanced administrative tools. An Upper Desktop is also a certification authority – an intermediary that guarantees the user that an application from independent developers satisfies desktop's ideology. Artifacts of the Past = Due to historical reasons Gnome (as well as KDE) is a mixture of both Lower and Upper Desktop concepts. I dare to say that such complex constructs if not reformed will only stagnate and collapse in the long run. However not all is that bad, some smart people founded freedesktop.org – something missing from Day One but now acting like an anchor in unsettled desktop waters (a truthful panegyric). Freedesktop.org is the Lower Desktop, a foundation for Upper Desktops. Keeping in mind the ideal vision described in previous passages it is now possible to deduce problems of Upper Desktops and suggest solutions. I am not familiar with Gnome internals so I want to leave this task to the Gnome community (if the community is not distracted by my “mental experiments”), but some points I want to mention here myself. As said, I am not familiar with Gnome internals, yet some things are pretty obvious, even at unconsciousness level. You probably remember “Mono Debate” - an epic tragicomedy of inclusion a C# runtime into Gnome. I suppose it is now evident why that culmination of absurd did not happen: a language run-time position is the lowest in the technology stack. (I want to add that existence of Mono is very important to free software, but this is a separate topic.) And the last: the mixture of technology and ideology slowly transforms Gnome from a software project into a political union of several forces (ranging from FOSS powers to individuals) who play this meritocracy game: make-contribution-gain-leverage. Instead of being a community of friends pursuing shared goals, Gnome is turning into a Wild West, a dangerous place where every contributor is being treated as an aggressor despite of his intentions. This is being done unconsciously because you have no leadership, beware! Instead of a happy-end: - GTK+ and its wrappers belong to Lower Desktop (freedesktop.org) - GnomeVFS and GConf belong to Lower
Re: Contribution
Calum Benson wrote: On 30 Aug 2006, at 13:30, Maxim Udushlivy wrote: . That is the problem: those checklists become constraints that hinder UI innovation. As a programmer (artist to some extent) I want to learn common sense principles that possibly would allow me to implement interface in a more productive way than guidelines authors may think of - and not to loose my personality by just following templates. The HIG provides many of those principles too, and we actually made a point of putting them at the front of the document, rather than the back. Like many things in the HIG, it could do with a refresh, though. Well, perhaps this dispute is in fact an innovation vs tradition philosophical conflict :) If this is true, there must be a place for both; and HIG's should exist, but only as recommendations, not as constraints. And a note about certification - all obvious HIG guidelines (checklists) I think should be moved from HIG to Gnome certification standard as must items - similar to those in Fedora: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines Windows programmers manage to create successful applications without guidelines. Hardly.. the Windows guidelines are the thickest ones on my bookshelf: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnwue/html/welcome.asp http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/Resources/windowsxp/default.mspx This is not a reply to my sentence ;) Even if guidelines exist that does not mean they are widely used. I disagree with HIG existence (more below) - but I suppose my opinion is not very important here ;) If you remember the mess GNOME was becoming before the guidelines existed, your opinion may be a little different :) Arrived two years ago, so cannot compare... but may be it's just a developers' professional growth, not tied to HIG's in any way? So here is that principle that I think make Google successful: reduce number of UI controls and expand application functionality while preserving UI/functionality coherency. I think that consumer electronics inherently follow this principle (TV, video recorders, phones, etc.) Yet video recorders and phones have historically had some of the worst UIs imaginable... so there must be more to it than that. You commented an illustration, not the principle itself ;) The principle I expressed is in fact a modern GUI cornerstone! (oops...) Some thoughts about being a Gnome application... I remember there was such a thing on Windows as application certification. Perhaps it was not very useful on Windows but Gnome may adopt this process. It's already being discussed; feel free to add your thoughts to http://live.gnome.org/GnomeCertification. My main thought about Gnome is very general: too much bureaucracy and politics, not enough technology and real activity ;) ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Contribution
Alan Horkan wrote: And about that HIG: guidelines have a tendency slowly but steadily to transform into constraints. It's much better to have principles instead of constraints. Guideline and checklists are easier to follow. That is the problem: those checklists become constraints that hinder UI innovation. As a programmer (artist to some extent) I want to learn common sense principles that possibly would allow me to implement interface in a more productive way than guidelines authors may think of - and not to loose my personality by just following templates. There is not always clear cut agreement on the principles either. If there is something in the HIG you disagree with I would strongly encourage you to mail the usability list and ask. Windows programmers manage to create successful applications without guidelines. I disagree with HIG existence (more below) - but I suppose my opinion is not very important here ;) There may well be room for alternative approachs which keep within the spirit and intentions of the guidelines. If you ask we should in most cases be able to explain to you some of the rationale behind a guideline or possible compromises which informed a decision at the time and could now be reapproached. The Guidelines are not carved in stone. The can and will be changed but most prefer to take the path of least resistance and make inconsistent applications rather than trying to promote changes in the HIG or even the toolkit. And that principle about Gnome simplicity - it's good, but it should not be achieved at the expense of functionality. Being simple does not mean being less functional. It is easier to say one has principles than to clearly express them and consistently follow them. The guidelines provide a useful way to express various ideas in a clearer less ambiguous fashion. I think I can clearly express such a principle ;) Take a look at google.com. Most of the time we use a text field and a search button. Two UI controls make a gate into the universe. Simple UI + great functionality (invisible search algorithms and an invisible index database) So here is that principle that I think make Google successful: reduce number of UI controls and expand application functionality while preserving UI/functionality coherency. I think that consumer electronics inherently follow this principle (TV, video recorders, phones, etc.) This discussion is getting very hypothetical but if you do have an specific examples in the HIG you disagree with and would like to reexamine please do bring the subject to the usability mailing list (but please do not cross post). Some thoughts about being a Gnome application... I remember there was such a thing on Windows as application certification. Perhaps it was not very useful on Windows but Gnome may adopt this process. User who downloads a Gnome-certified application is guaranteed about certain level of stability, functionality, dependability, usability, etc. Application developers should contend for certification and Gnome project must define some standards and have formal review procedures. I think this will improve Gnome much better and faster that those passive HIG's ;) ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Contribution
Maxim Udushlivy wrote: Random thought: opposition to a commercial software project is a capitalism while opposition to a community-based foss project is sometimes like a revolt. :) Yet another thought: I think you certainly need to reorient Gnome from politics towards technology. Such things as 10x10 and spreadgnome.org looks very political. But gnome-tech.org for example is much better I think. Software-as-a-servant, not software-as-an-idol. And about that HIG: guidelines have a tendency slowly but steadily to transform into constraints. It's much better to have principles instead of constraints. And that principle about Gnome simplicity - it's good, but it should not be achieved at the expense of functionality. Being simple does not mean being less functional. For example credit card is quite simple, but its functionality surpass imagination ;) ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Contribution
Maxim Udushlivy wrote: Greetings :) Noticed news about spreadgnome.org, was frightened for some reason and suddenly realized that Gideon Designer is not neutral to Gnome, but is in a conflict. And since I am not an animal and trying to be a Christian, I (usually ;) seek peace and like to make gifts. I want to change GuiLoader license to LGPL and contribute Gideon and GuiLoader to Gnome. Interested? /Maxim Udushlivy Additional note: I do not seek leverage, in fact I have a long-term plan to pass Gideon Designer to volunteers and retire from free software. Also I would be glad to sell it of cause. And about fudding Gnome - I really was not realizing that, I was like blinded and that speadgnome.org opened my eyes :) Perhaps this is because I am a windows immigrant and I do not fully understand FOSS landscape. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Contribution
Greetings :) Noticed news about spreadgnome.org, was frightened for some reason and suddenly realized that Gideon Designer is not neutral to Gnome, but is in a conflict. And since I am not an animal and trying to be a Christian, I (usually ;) seek peace and like to make gifts. I want to change GuiLoader license to LGPL and contribute Gideon and GuiLoader to Gnome. Interested? /Maxim Udushlivy ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Contribution
Johan Dahlin wrote: I'm not sure I see the point of one more ui designer and one more ui loader... Johan I dare to say that I am offering a Porsche 911 while you are talking about broken bicycles ;) ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Contribution
Tommi Komulainen wrote: Where we're going, we don't need roads. Sorry, it had to be said ;) Sorries are not needed, I am not an English lord ;) ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Contribution
Jonathon Jongsma wrote: Maxim, is there a public source code repository somewhere? I can only find tarballs. Hi, public repository was not set up yet; current tarballs represent the latest code. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
