>After over a decade of GTK claiming fractional scaling is "impossible" and
So it's just as impossible as thumbnails in the file picker? The insanity of the GTK and the resilience of people willing to put up with it is baffling to me.
So it's just as impossible as thumbnails in the file picker? The insanity of the GTK and the resilience of people willing to put up with it is baffling to me.
A honest „thank you“ to the people which made the thumbnails possible would be helpful. And involving itself. Or spending money. Gtk and GNOME are not companies. People need a motivation - from their work or from outside.
These are large entities made up of people, same as companies, not individual devs making a side project. Does that mean their work should not be criticized because their collective is not a registered publicly listed company?
>People need a motivation - from their work or from outside.
Also feedback. And that was my feedback, candid as it may be.
Like I said below, FOSS work doesn't mean it should automatically be excluded form criticism, especially if that FOSS work is so big and influential enough that it ends up having impact on other products and on people's work and lives, like Gnome being the default on most free but also commercial distros.
So please let's stop attacking and gaslighting critics, as if GNOME is some teenager developing his first app for free in his bedroom who should only be defended and praised for encouragement, instead of the giant mammoth project with private and public funding[1] developed by vested professionals of the software industry who know very well what they're doing and should be criticized when they do something wrong or are being needlessly petty and stubborn with their decisions and arguments, besides being praised when doing something right as there's already enough of that in this topic if you read it.
[1] https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2023/11/gnome-sovereign-tech-fun...
And I’m happy about Linux, GCC, Vim, Coretils and Gtk in general. GNOMEs keyboard centric usage is wonderful.
That said. I’m usually sad about public long term forks. Because they are not about learning or improvement but that people often failed to communicate. Yes, sometimes their targets are just differing.
Anyone good news? Maybe Mutter will support VRR itself. And maybe battery thresholds in a user friendly way. Woohooo
No we just need convince the right people to add Type-Ahead-Find back in Nautilus and background transparency officially back in gnome-terminal. Both „back“. There is existing code for both.
Or just make a fork if you want to.
"Company" doesn't mean "business". It means a bunch of companions. Like the company in `The Fellowship of the Ring`.
People are willing and ready to spend money on quality software. It is a trillion dollar industry. Open source is an endless circle of misery that needs to be ended as soon as possible.
GTK doing something right , doesn't suddenly absolve it of all the wrongs. And just because something is FOSS doesn't mean it's not without fault and therefore without criticism.
Sorry, maybe I was rude, but someone needs to call out BS claims like this as they probably have enough "yes men" tooting their horn.
Do they, though? Does it have any effect at all, other than potentially demotivating volunteer contributors? And if so, do those effects outweigh the negative effects?
Devs could have implemented thumbnails in file picker over a decade ago, but Gnome leadership was always against it.
Toxic and poor leadershipof such large projects should be openly criticized and pointed at, and not allow to hide and be gaslighten behind the "poor small volunteer devs".
Please stop this bullshit.
And is there anywhere where we can see that this elite leadership suddenly changed their minds on allowing this, rather than a developer seeing an opportunity when a bunch of things got deprecated, which had been postponed for a long time because it creates a lot of work for downstreams [0]?
Or is the fact that they didn't want to haphazardly break those downstreams the poor leadership you speak of?
[0] https://blog.gtk.org/2022/12/15/a-grid-for-the-file-chooser/
If you're designing a mainstream product that's not just targeting professional SW developers who can contribute back with code, but also average users who will only use it but never contribute, then you will need to be open to mainstream levels of feedback that represent the average user and not just programmers.
Otherwise let's keep complaining Linux and FOSS alternatives have only ~2% market share that it's somehow the users' fault for only buying Microsoft/Apple and not the projects' for being stubborn to feedback and out of touch with their mainstream users.
One way to tell if you should care about an opinion is to check and see if the person professing it has taken any concrete actions toward getting the world to align with it.
Thankfully large projects generally have feedback loop systems to figure out how to parse that feedback.
The rest of your comment isn't particularly contributing to the discussion here, short of trying to re-cement a broken take.
Regarding FOSS, I think some users forget that they're at a free lunch and are unpleasant and insistent about their complaints as if they were paying. They're not entitled to service and don't seem to realise it.
As to whether everyone else should listen - sure - but nobody is forced to work overtime just to right some wrong in OSS software because person A was very upset about it.
https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/gtk3-filechooser...
Also, why isn't that patch in an MR to GTK (if the author wanted to upstream it)?
As for the Mr, again there were a few of them and it's very easy to find. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/issues/233#note_106497
The whole thread is full of people actively writing, fixing, rebasing code, creating MRs for years
These MRs do a minimal change to just add thumbnails. The current file manager uses outdated widgets. Gnome/GTK expects MRs to also replace deprecated widgets in all files touched by that MR. Replacing those deprecated widgets would require a massive refactor.
But they're not the same people as the ones that blocked specs and PRs by stating this was "impossible".
Blocking valuable improvements with an absolute statement like that makes contributing to such projects feel like fighting against windmills.
So from where I sit, one might as well not make them. (And I'm pushing back a bit to hopefully support the contributors who I'm grateful to.)