jdub

They've done quite a bit of lower profile live streams... various events, and the Everybody's in LA chat show series.

Count yourself lucky (by mere hundreds of years) you have spaces.

But from the very beginning, Canonical/Ubuntu chose to make mirroring the repo easy, and encouraged the usual network of public mirrors to participate, much as Debian and other distros had done for years. (It wouldn't be unfair to say that Canonical/Ubuntu had to meet the expectation those distributions had set.)

That is something the WordPress community (albeit centralised in the WordPress.org decision makers) could have been doing for decades.

You're thinking of a stereotype of autism.

ADHD frequently involves Rejection Sensitivity Dysmorphia, which makes someone more attuned to, while also more likely to misconstrue, social signals.

"power cells that generate electricity from algae"... in mice

You probably deserved it.

When I started using Honeycomb, I had such a wonderful integration experience with their Beeline SDKs.

Then they transitioned to OpenTelemetry – for very good, justifiable, "good community member" reasons – and yikes, everything got so much more complicated. We ended up writing our own moral equivalent to the Beeline SDK. (And Honeycomb have followed up since with their own wrappers.)

There's so much I love about Open Source, but piles and piles of wildly generic, unopinionated code... ooft. :-)

(The subtext of my prior message: I'm starting a fist fight with New Zealand.)

> Plop one in Virginia and you can get the English speaking world in under 100ms of latency.

Never start a fist fight with an Australian. Let alone 26 million of us at the same time.

Two key differences: Linux is (mostly) licensed under the GPL version 2.0 only, and has diverse copyright ownership. No single person or entity can change the license. That means no one can pull the rug from under the community like the Redis change (and so many other corporate-controlled, copyright-assigned, non-copyleft projects).

(Linux also has a huge pool of users and contributors, which discourages hostile forking, even if the licensing wasn't a factor.)

Yes. Directly – no CDK or wrappers – using the serverless transform when it makes sense.

I know how CloudFormation behaves, and none of the wrappers have convinced me that translating through CloudFormation makes sense. ("through" because if you're using CDK, you're translating from imperative to declarative to imperative... why?!)

But the successful test is not even remotely the moral conclusion of the story.

There won't be a killer app for Wayland specifically. It's infrastructure. It's also not the place where all the showy (but ultimately annoying) user interface fluff will be found. It's infrastructure.

The question is what can it do that X can't, and there are plenty of examples mentioned in this thread (including no tearing, high refresh rates, multiple monitors with different DPI, etc).

What's important about X is the clients. Thus, Xwayland.

Ubuntu was released with GNOME 2.8, was shipping Unity as the default desktop at the time GNOME 3 was released, and only switched the default desktop to GNOME 3.28 (configured to look more like Unity) in 2018.

It's not a matter of the environment vs economic austerity, rejected by the people, it's the environment vs corporate abuse, rejected by those in power.

I was the release manager of GNOME 2, a very early employee at Canonical, and continued to be involved with GNOME during the GNOME 3 efforts.

It's difficult to elaborate on "nope", unless someone wanted to do a point-by-point takedown, which it doesn't deserve.

I'll focus on one thing: the genesis of GNOME 3.

Firstly, it felt like the right time. Many of us were looking around for ways to break out of the Windows 95 paradigm. New form-factors were both inspiring and challenging.

One of my clearest memories of early ideas that became GNOME 3 was an ongoing conversation about a "chromeless desktop". How could we get as much "chrome" (user interface elements) off the screen as possible, to make every pixel available for what the user was doing? Some of us started from "what if there were nothing on the screen at all?" and added back only what was necessary. These ideas dovetailed with the form-factor challenges posed by early tablets (including the OLPC), beefier PDA devices (Nokia 770), and netbooks (tiny, cheap laptops, like the Eee PC).

You can see how that led to GNOME 3's minimalist top bar (though we had tried even less "chrome"!) and modal approach between the app experience and the control experience.

None of this is remotely true. I was there.

You question the phrase "late stage capitalists" and use the phrase "cultural marxists"? Shoo.

Sadly, no one will use your extremely slow text editor.

That is ahistorical, and the misnaming doesn't help make your point.

Gtk has always been primarily built by and for Linux users.

Supporting a feature on one platform does not make a toolkit less relevant or practical on another platform.

They do, it's just not hugely visible. Two great conferences where some of that work happened were linux.conf.au and the Linux Plumbers Conference.

GNOME has driven plenty of important system level integration initiatives. Because that's what you have to do when building a user experience.

Try calling a guitar a "gadget" to serious players or collectors. :-)

That's mostly the timeframe of his career. It doesn't put jerks at his level.

They're not even in the same sport, let alone the same league.

Vint Cerf