Re: Regarding behaviour of Gnome and Fedora members

[Ty Young via desktop-devel-list]

On 6/12/20 7:40 AM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:



Also, I'd recommend mellowing out, because you're one step away from 
ranting on youtube about lizard people secretly controlling the world 
governments.



I had just seen your Twitter post, by the by. Talking crap behind 
people's backs isn't very nice, you know?



And since you started the political poo flinging and no one cares about 
their Code of Conduct, allow me this:



"also, I'd recommend getting anger management classes, because you're 
one step away from throwing bricks into  and looting independently owned 
small-businesses, staging an insurrection, declaring an autonomous zone, 
and extorting businesses."



Fair enough, yes?






Ciao,
 Emmanuele.

--
https://www.bassi.io
[@] ebassi [@gmail.com ]
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: Regarding behaviour of Gnome and Fedora members

[Ty Young via desktop-devel-list]

On 6/12/20 7:40 AM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jun 2020 at 13:30, Ty Young via desktop-devel-list 
mailto:desktop-devel-list@gnome.org>> 
wrote:


...sorry, just read the xkcd link. That, IMO, does indeed violates
GNOME's Code of Conduct. There sure are a lot of people violating
their
own project's inclusion and community standards...


Let's be clear: just because people don't agree with your take and 
tell you to go away doesn't mean they are violating the code of conduct.



I didn't say otherwise.




Harassing people because they don't cave to your condescending 
remarks, and don't do whatever you want, is, on the other hand, a code 
of conduct violation; so I respectfully ask you stop doing that, and 
leave this community.



Sorry, what condescending remarks have I made? I would like to correct 
them, if possible. And what will be done about GNOME foundation member's 
condescending remarks regarding their users:



They actually don’t have any influence.. they prove their entitlement by 
their very statement. They are not the people writing the code, they are 
consumers — it’s all a bunch of pageantry because they are triggered.



Surely we can agree that this is inappropriate for any official GNOME 
member to say in regards to their users, yes?






Also, I'd recommend mellowing out, because you're one step away from 
ranting on youtube about lizard people secretly controlling the world 
governments.


Ciao,
 Emmanuele.

--
https://www.bassi.io
[@] ebassi [@gmail.com <http://gmail.com>]
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: Regarding behaviour of Gnome and Fedora members

[Ty Young via desktop-devel-list]

On 6/12/20 7:24 AM, Ty Young wrote:


On 6/12/20 7:20 AM, Andre Klapper wrote:

On Fri, 2020-06-12 at 05:50 -0500, Ty Young wrote:

They have engaged in racism and censorship

You seem to confuse the terms "censorship" and "moderation". You may
want to look up definitions. If that takes too much time, then a short
(but likely also "unfriendly") summary could be http://xkcd.com/1357/

Furthermore, Reddit stuff and Fedora lists are third-parties.
The scope of this list is about GNOME *development* instead.
See https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list



Sorry, I tried finding a "users" gnome list and couldn't find one. 
Where do I go, besides emailing code-of-conduct list? I do not believe 
code-of-conduct is appropriate as there is a conflict of interest.



...sorry, just read the xkcd link. That, IMO, does indeed violates 
GNOME's Code of Conduct. There sure are a lot of people violating their 
own project's inclusion and community standards...








Thanks,
andre
--
Andre Klapper  |  ak...@gmx.net
https://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/



___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: Regarding behaviour of Gnome and Fedora members

[Ty Young via desktop-devel-list]

On 6/12/20 6:33 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote:

On Fri, 2020-06-12 at 05:50 -0500, Ty Young via desktop-devel-list
wrote:

So, could anything be done about any of this?

You said you were leaving 8 months ago:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/issues/1661#note_609870

I think it might be a good idea if you did.

You can use this link to ask for your gitlab account to be closed:
https://gitlab.gnome.org/Infrastructure/Infrastructure/-/issues/new?issue%5Bassignee_id%5D=%5Bmilestone_id%5D=



That was in regards to Gitlab, not Reddit and in general is irrelevant. 
Reddit is a website not owned or controlled by GNOME. I have posted 
positive content on said forum:



https://www.reddit.com/r/gnome/comments/gyjrbk/hell_has_frozen_over_mutlitasking_customization/


Your reply violates the Code of Conduct, IMO, namely be respectful, 
empathetic, considerate, patient and generous and friendly sections of 
the community guidelines. If you don't have anything constructive to say 
or, at the very least, can't say it in a polite way, I'd ask that you 
don't reply. Thanks.


___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Regarding behaviour of Gnome and Fedora members

[Ty Young via desktop-devel-list]

Hi all,


Gnome recently has stirred up controversy lately and aren't taking other 
people's opinions very well, to say the least. So far they've locked 
three threads:



https://www.reddit.com/r/gnome/comments/gz6fks/we_must_all_speak_up/

https://www.reddit.com/r/gnome/comments/h107as/i_agree_with_the_we_all_must_speak_up_and_the/ 



https://www.reddit.com/r/gnome/comments/h0ml37/distrotube_has_posted_a_disgusting_video_calling/


They have engaged in racism and censorship in their subreddit's comment 
sections and, just recently, banned me for posting this article, which 
I've made:



https://medium.com/@youngty1997/gnome-needs-to-be-better-2151965fd663


You may read it for yourself. In it I cite violations of Gnome's Code of 
Conduct by members of the GNOME foundation or the GNOME 
foundation(gnome.org email address), both on their subreddit and from 
fedora-devel list. I tried to cite as much as possible but Gnome 
moderators refused to hand over the moderation logs for when they locked 
a thread for reporting a bug when asked. I'm confident that they know 
what I'm talking about but just refuse to hand it over.



Keep in mind that, in Gnome's subreddit rules, it's perfectly OK to 
criticize GNOME in GNOME's subreddit. It's even in the sidebar, which 
you cannot see on old reddit(something I've told them about multiple 
times, but they've ignored repeatedly to fix):



"We do not shy away from criticism, in fact, we encourage it!"


GNOME members have recently said that "This mixing of ideas from a wide 
range of backgrounds is something that has improved free and open source 
software, and it should be highly valued."



However, their actions by locking threads and now banned me for sharing 
an article I had made goes against this statement. To be crystal clear 
here, the opinions shared in the article are not *just* my own. You may 
also read people who agree with my opinions in comment sections of the 
GNOME subreddit and Fedora subreddit which I shared it to:



https://www.reddit.com/r/Fedora/comments/h7de62/gnome_needs_to_be_better/

https://www.reddit.com/r/gnome/comments/h7ddom/gnome_needs_to_be_better/


Gnome did not say that any new threads on the topic could be made nor 
was there any rule breakage that I could find. I would have loved to 
cite more things but alas, I don't have access to the information.



Sadly the moderators of each respective subreddits have censored the 
threads, and not even snew shows them for some reason. I've tried 
contacting the fedora subreddit moderators but I have a feeling they 
won't ever answer.



I was planning on fileing a Code of Conduct violation, but GNOME refused 
to turn over the requested moderation logs, so I couldn't do so and, 
Gnome's Code of Conduct hints as what the result will be anyway. I have 
zero confidence that anything will be done, so here I am sending an email.



So, could anything be done about any of this?



___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: How to detect a gtk desktop programmatically

[Ty Young via desktop-devel-list]

On 4/29/20 4:17 PM, Tres Finocchiaro via desktop-devel-list wrote:
I'd like to disclaim that since I'm not an OpenJDK developer, the 
upstream decision may very-well be to attempt to load Gtk when the 
system is anything other than Windows or MacOS.  I can't speak on 
behalf of the end-strategy of OpenJDK and I do not represent them or 
their solution to this problem.


That said, for reasons mentioned above as well as evidence in Gnome's 
codebase, Debian's codebase and Java's codebase, I observe a valid 
use-case for asking if the desktop environment is Gtk-based.  To deny 
that suggests that solutions which check are invalid, or contain no 
value and I believe this perspective to be short-sighted as 
admittingly my sight is as well.


-Tres

- tres.finocchi...@gmail.com 




Not a Gnome/GTK/OpenJDK developer but it sounds like you're asking for 
the wrong thing. What you need is standard way of getting a list of UI 
toolkits(GTK/QT/whatever) installed. It doesn't matter what the desktop 
is, only that GTK is installed.



Good luck with that, by the by. Even if you could somehow get 
Gnome/KDE/whomever to agree to implement such a thing(ha!), distros will 
find a way to break it somehow.


___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: GNOME 3.34.4

[Ty Young via desktop-devel-list]

This update seems to have introduced black visual graphical glitching 
when maximizing and demaximizing, at least in Arch Linux and on Nvidia 
binary driver.



Looks like it (only) affects applications that use the CSD(System 
Monitor, tweaks, etc) and not traditional(Thunderbird).




On 2/19/20 10:57 AM, Matthias Clasen via desktop-devel-list wrote:

Hi,

here is another stable GNOME update: GNOME 3.34.4.

This release contains several weeks worth of bug fixes, and should
be a very safe upgrade from 3.34.3.

The GNOME flatpak runtime has been updated as well

There next (and last) stable 3.34 update is planned for end of
March, see
https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointThirtyfive

If you want to compile GNOME 3.34.4, you can use the official
BuildStream project snapshot:

  https://download.gnome.org/teams/releng/3.34.4/gnome-3.34.4.tar.xz

The list of updated modules and changes is available here:

  https://download.gnome.org/core/3.34/3.34.4/NEWS

The source packages are available here:

  https://download.gnome.org/core/3.34/3.34.4/sources/

Enjoy the new release,

Matthias Clasen,
GNOME Release Team

___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: GNOME 3.34 released

[Ty Young via desktop-devel-list]

On 9/13/19 8:18 AM, Andre Klapper wrote:

On Fri, 2019-09-13 at 04:56 -0500, Ty Young wrote:

In terms of features, this has to be one of the biggest Gnome releases
in years. Looking forward to using it when Arch Linux decides to release
it in full... they keep breaking it up into segmented updates for some
reason resulting in all sorts of breakage and mismatching between the
old and new versions. Has anyone talked to them about that?

Personally I'd say that it's up to distributions how distributions
package and ship components, and up to users of distributions to
discuss packaging improvements with packagers of the distribution.



And then you have users reporting false bugs either because of component 
mismatching and/or distros not updating at all.






Bit of a problem however... A background image that I used was removed
in this version and there isn't any fallback logic to reset the
background image. Can this maybe be fixed in the first point release so
it never happens again please? Pure white desktop backgrounds aren't
very pleasant to look at...

Feel free to file a bug report with clear steps to reproduce and
version information in https://gitlab.gnome.org - thanks!



Looks like someone already did and submitted a patch. That was fast...


I don't get why the image was even removed. It had existed in Gnome for 
years but now all of a sudden it's gone?





Thanks,
andre
--
Andre Klapper  |  ak...@gmx.net
https://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/


___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: GNOME 3.34 released

[Ty Young via desktop-devel-list]

In terms of features, this has to be one of the biggest Gnome releases 
in years. Looking forward to using it when Arch Linux decides to release 
it in full... they keep breaking it up into segmented updates for some 
reason resulting in all sorts of breakage and mismatching between the 
old and new versions. Has anyone talked to them about that?



Bit of a problem however... A background image that I used was removed 
in this version and there isn't any fallback logic to reset the 
background image. Can this maybe be fixed in the first point release so 
it never happens again please? Pure white desktop backgrounds aren't 
very pleasant to look at...


___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: I believe we should reconsider our sys-tray removal

[Ty Young via desktop-devel-list]

On 4/22/19 4:12 PM, Shaun McCance wrote:

On Mon, 2019-04-22 at 15:50 -0500, Ty Young via desktop-devel-list
wrote:

On 4/22/19 9:42 AM, Shaun McCance wrote:

I can't speak to the rest of this long email, but I can clarify one
thing:

On Fri, 2019-04-19 at 18:05 -0500, Ty Young via desktop-devel-list
wrote:

A) Calling "activities" the "overview". These are used
interchangeably. Search "overview" in Gnome Software and you will
get
extensions that affect "activities" and call "activities" the
"overview". While I made a mistake and switched to overview it is
still technically correct(or at least no one can agree on what to
call it).

The screen you get when you click Activities or use the hot corner
is
called "the Activities overview". That's what it's called (or
should be
called) in all official documentation. If random redditers just say
"activities" or "the overview" in casual conversation, that doesn't
particularly bother me. It would be nice if extension developers
would
use the correct term in their descriptions though.

--
Shaun


Thanks for the clarification Shaun. This is known by all Gnome 3
developers correct? If so, why was no correction ever made

Honestly, probably not. It's not like we have some sort of official
terminology training course before people become GNOME developers, and
the documentation team has unfortunately been unable to maintain a good
terminology list for some time now. Consistent terminology is good, but
I'm not going to chase people down on every social media platform
telling them what words to use.



Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't expect anyone to do that either. 
/r/gnome is the official Gnome subreddit however and "poor discussion" 
is supposedly not allowed(bit vague but whatever) which one would think 
would include trolling and incorrect information. Instead of correcting 
or removing these comments they are instead allowed to stay up, which is 
why I want a correction to be made.




  and the
trolling and "poor discussion" allowed(and still is) to continue?
Why
are the rules of the official Gnome 3 subreddit applied only when
the
moderators feel like it? Why are articles/blog/discussion posts
discussing Gnome 3 in a negative light being removed even though they
do
not break any of the mobile-only-visible rules?

I'm not sure what terminology has to do with trolling? And I didn't see
any outright trolling in any of the links you provided. Maybe I missed
something. I saw some disagreements, and a couple cases where poeple
probably could have worded something a little nicer, but nothing I'd
ever ban someone for. (I'm not a mod.)



Ah, didn't know that you weren't a mod. Many of the comments in that 
Reddit thread are sarcastic comments on the use of the word "overview" 
instead of "activities" as if it was wrong or incorrect among other 
things from my medium post.





Anyway, d-d-l is almost certainly not the place for this conversation.



Agreed. Apologies. Is there an active list where this can be brought up 
that is actually active? Gnome has like 50 and most aren't active at all.




If you think users on /r/gnome are doing something bad, you should take
it up with the mods. If you think the mods are doing something bad, you
should take it to the Foundation board.



There is a bit of a conflict of interest there. The same mods on the 
subreddit are also moderators of the subreddit.





--
Shaun



___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: I believe we should reconsider our sys-tray removal

[Ty Young via desktop-devel-list]

On 4/22/19 9:42 AM, Shaun McCance wrote:

I can't speak to the rest of this long email, but I can clarify one
thing:

On Fri, 2019-04-19 at 18:05 -0500, Ty Young via desktop-devel-list
wrote:

A) Calling "activities" the "overview". These are used
interchangeably. Search "overview" in Gnome Software and you will get
extensions that affect "activities" and call "activities" the
"overview". While I made a mistake and switched to overview it is
still technically correct(or at least no one can agree on what to
call it).

The screen you get when you click Activities or use the hot corner is
called "the Activities overview". That's what it's called (or should be
called) in all official documentation. If random redditers just say
"activities" or "the overview" in casual conversation, that doesn't
particularly bother me. It would be nice if extension developers would
use the correct term in their descriptions though.

--
Shaun



Thanks for the clarification Shaun. This is known by all Gnome 3 
developers correct? If so, why was no correction ever made and the 
trolling and "poor discussion" allowed(and still is) to continue? Why 
are the rules of the official Gnome 3 subreddit applied only when the 
moderators feel like it? Why are articles/blog/discussion posts 
discussing Gnome 3 in a negative light being removed even though they do 
not break any of the mobile-only-visible rules?






___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: I believe we should reconsider our sys-tray removal

[Ty Young via desktop-devel-list]

Thank you so much for bringing this up(again). I had originally only 
subscribed to this mailing list to see if some bugs I had ran across in 
3.32 were already known(to which no one replied but whatever) but I'm 
glad because it only proves one of my points about Gnome shooting itself 
in the foot by removing features that developers(and often by extension 
users) use and relying on community made extensions to fix it.



I haven't read the prior discussions or even the series of emails in 
this thread before but I have to ask: was this outcome really that 
unexpected?



Not to put down Gnome 3 extension developers or anything since they've 
clearly benefited Gnome 3 by allowing customization and features that 
Gnome isn't willing to allow/add but uh, it is an objective fact that 
Gnome extensions can cause performance, reliability, and usability 
problems. Antergos installs by default a Gnome 3 extension to add 
shutdown/lock buttons to the upper right menu for LightDM which 
did(still does? I use GDM now. Don't know.) crash often resulting in no 
way to lock/restart the system. Extensions, even when shipped by default 
in a distribution, brake between versions. They can't be depended on.



Developers are reluctant enough to port applications to Linux. They see 
Gnome 3, the most prominent Linux desktop environment, not support 
something that their app needs and is supported on more popular and 
profitable platforms like Windows and MacOS and they might just not 
bother porting it over to Linux *especially* with no viable easy 
alternatives. For the developers that were/are already on Linux, they 
*clearly* don't care(why should they? Linux is only like 2% market 
share) and their app is partially or fully broken on Gnome 3. Some 
developers might (reasonably) even demand that users install one of the 
Topicons extensions which makes Gnome 3 look bad because it both doesn't 
support it by default and extensions aren't reliable(above).



So again, I'd like to ask: was this outcome really that unexpected? What 
*was* expected to happen? I understand that there were technical reasons 
for them being removed but not only was it extremely sudden at the 
time(IIRC) there was no viable alternative. I remember asking a Gnome 
developer on Reddit about it and the response was something along the 
lines of "you should use the new notification system". What? How does 
that offer the same or similar functionality as tray icons? Is it 
possible to permanently display a "App  is hidden. Click here to 
unhide." and get an event when the user clicks it? Even if it does, it 
still doesn't provide the same functionality.



Please make the right decision and bring them back. I understand there 
is some debate on where they should be located in the shell if they were 
to return(among other things)... but personally I think the most 
appropriate place would be in the top right in a drop down tray. My 
arguments for putting it there are:



A) It follows other Gnome extension location/behavior such as "removable 
drive menu"



B) It follows what Windows does which Gnome has used as a reference for 
its application designs before



C) it would allow for multiple app icons without cluttering the top bar 
like Topicons Plus does or any other part of the desktop



By default left clicking an app icon should bring the application to the 
user's view while right clicking should open the app specific context 
menu. Is that not possible currently? It seems like the middle scroll 
wheel and right mouse buttons are hijacked to do a left mouse click. Is 
that not possible to change?



While I'm here, I'd like to talk about the behavior and moderation of 
the /r/gnome(and other places) subreddit mods and its users because 
frankly it's a bit ridiculous.



Firstly(as linked in my article, direct link here: 
https://archive.fo/KKR25) a developer/foundation member of Gnome 
attacked a user for pointing out a fairly huge UX fail with Gnome 
Photos(and any other app that uses tracker). I don't even use Gnome 
Photos or related so I was a bit confused at first until I actually 
opened Gnome Photos only to see dozens of images from an extracted Java 
JRE in my downloads folder. It is absolutely a problem and for a Gnome 
developer/foundation member to respond in such a way without at least 
trying to understand the problem looks really bad on Gnome as a whole.



Secondly, there was this(https://archive.fo/Ng2IC) which was clearly in 
response to my article(along with /r/linux posts). Not only do the 
mods(/r/gnome) of in that Reddit thread allow trolling(which breaks the 
rules which you can only see on mobile for some reason. Banning people 
for rules that users that don't exist or can't see is /r/linux level 
bad.) but also fail to correct many troll/inaccurate things said 
throughout the thread, namely:



A) Calling "activities" the "overview". These are used interchangeably. 
Search "overview" in Gnome Software and you will get