> > I believe it will drive people away, hurt
> > upstreams, a number of side streams and limited sections of downstream.
> >
> What does that mean exactly? I think you're mouthing off because you
> don't like the idea of having to go with something you don't
> personally like occasionally.
Martin is looking at the big picture. He's concerned that you are going
down a path that will cause a fork or general disruption. I agree.
Linux is at a fragile state. It is posed to make a significant mark in
the desktop/portable market in the next couple of years. This kind of
derailment could destroy the momentum.
Ok, hold on a second. How come the presence or absence of options in some
quite experimental software DESTROYS moment of Linux Desktop??? I can't understand
how is it that after so many work being put into the operating system, and specifically Ubuntu Linux,
everything would depend on some specific implementation of some specific idea?
And what if other distributions decide not to use Notify-OSD? Is complete Linux OS will be suddenly doomed?
>
> > But I have no data on that, that's just from my own principles of
> > inclusion and experience in trying to do the hard job of bringing
> > together conflicting ideas.
> >
> If you have deep experience of that you'll understand what I mean when
> I say you cannot always include everybody if you want a decisive and
> exciting result. You can aim to include everyone if you are
> comfortable taking a very long time to produce something that is hard
> to use and ultimately not exciting.
But if you refuse to offer any customization, you tick off the very
people you need to survive.
I don't believe that. I do believe that when the Notify-OSD will be release in official 9.10, many
developers and otherwise technically inclined people will have absolutely great time to create
exciting applications with it. I do believe that there's a lot of place for creativity here.
> > > In Ayatana, we'll take an opinionated stance, and we'll apply some
> > > common principles to the design process,
> > >
> >
> > This principle isn't common,
> This willingness to be decisive isn't common, no. By common principles
> I meant that we will focus on specific areas of the experience, bring
> some specific principles to bear, and live with the results.
"Live with the results" This really scares me. I've looked forward to
your guidance to the community with regard to big picture concepts like
cadence and collaboration.
This statement looks like your account has been hijacked and you're in
Hawaii. =0
Uhm, why is it so hard to include "let do this and change that" into "live with the
results"? It's no an MS process, where the decision is made, it never gets reviewed
and nobody cares what users think. We have an interactive process, where something
is released (soon to be in this case too), then it gets feedback, and then new iteration cycle
begins. But to produce great product it is imperative to have focus. You can't have focus with
too much stuff on your hands, so in some cases (and this is one of them) the choices will
be made that may seem too harsh to some people. That's just life.
> Whether or not non-computer-specialist people continue to embrace and
> enjoy Ubuntu. And whether computer specialists continue to do the
> same.
It's the second group that you are in danger of alienating. :/
Hardly so. I don't believe that technically savvy people will stop using Ubuntu
because they can't change the default position of Notify-OSD.
>
> Don't think that Ubuntu is built on equality of the producers. It is
> not. It's built on empowering the best people to lead and take
> decisions.
And a huge amount of community support. The human resources around
Debian and Ubuntu dwarf any capital investments thus far.
Remember that you stand on the shoulders of giants. And they are fickle.
Indeed so.
>
> You don't have to look very far to find projects with similar goals to
> Ubuntu that don't have the guts or the willpower to take the same
> approach. You can see for yourself the consequences - paralysis,
> indecisiveness, slowness, complexity.
>
> If you're reacting to the fact that right now I'm a driving force in
> this, understand that the role will shift onto the shoulders of others
> as that capability in Ubuntu and Canonical matures. It's been that way
> with many things.
I don't think that anyone has a problem with you. You've made
tremendous contributions to the Linux desktop.
BTW, I could care less about the position of the box. This problem is
bigger picture.
We see a dark path. We see you walking down it. You don't seem to see
it even with your experience in open source. It's contradictory and
disturbing.
Please Jim, get some proportion here. How come one application, albeit at the core
of the system, leads to a dark path? What if in future versions, it will split into backend and
frontend, and anyone will be able to write their own frontend with their gazillions of options?
Would that solve the conceptual problem with this battle?
Alex.