There is so much I whole heartedly disagree with in your attitude and point
of view in this thread that will take me too much energy and time and
arguing to cover.  I think other developers are coming to this same
realization and are leaving rather than trying to change your mind.  This
project has become far more than just you and your opinion and what you
think is right but every word you say is coming out with an arrogance to it
that you can't possibly be wrong, and it seems this is why you don't want
to add any structure because then there would be rules that you too would
have to follow and decisions made that you would not like.  While having a
free to work on and push whatever you like unless raster vetos it community
works out really well for you, you are not the entire dev or users
community and they are the ones being hurt.  Our community is clearly down
and grasping for air.  I don't think arguing for the status quo is a good

On Sat, Mar 10, 2018, 3:43 AM Carsten Haitzler <> wrote:

> On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 11:28:01 -0500 "William L. Thomson Jr."
> <> said:
> > On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 13:38:36 +0900
> > Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) <> wrote:
> >
> > > a volunteer is not going to do something they dislike. certainly not
> > > readily. users have to convince the volunteer to do it. not the other
> > > way around (that volunteers need to be slaves to users and do work
> > > for them even if the volunteer disagrees and dislikes it). volunteers
> > > don't get paid... they do things because they desire and want to.
> > > it's the user's job to convince them... or for the user to stand up
> > > and do it themselves. :)
> >
> > Yes and no. Being a volunteer does not mean you just show up and do
> > what ever you want to do. I do not think anyone who thinks along those
> > lines has ever volunteered in person. In my area we do things like
> > beach cleanup, hurricane and disaster recovery. You do no get to just
> > show up and do what ever. You do get assigned things to do as a
> > volunteer.
> that's not how open source works. there is nothing keeping you around
> unlike
> thew moral obligation you put on yourself to volunteer to clean up after a
> disaster for example.
> they are very very very different things. also physically volunteering
> means
> that walking away is something everyone sees you do. there is a face to it.
> walking away from an oss project is simply stopping work. invariably there
> are
> not even real names let alone faces associated. there e never many
> repercussions that you'd get from the example above like your neighbours
> and
> community giving you a hard time after walking off.
> also cleanup after a disaster is doing what has to be done, not what
> someone
> WANTS to be done. how would you like it if you volunteered to clean up and
> the
> home owner comes by to the house you're cleaning stuff out of and says "oh
> by
> the way. paint the walls lime green... no not that green. this green. and
> can
> you rebuild my garage to be a double instead of single, also use concrete
> instead of gravel on the driveway..." any volunteer and organization will
> tell
> them to jump in the lake. they get the cleanup they get. not just the
> exact way
> they want it to be. the volunteers and organization decide what needs
> doing.
> not the "users". they don't get a say.
> > When it comes to FOSS this gets lost. People think its my time, my
> > volunteering, I am going to do what ever I want with my time. That is
> > true within reason. But that also says they only care about themselves,
> > not the project, or what ever they are volunteering for.
> that is absolutely correct. that's what it is. it's not a humanitarian
> effort to
> clean up after a disaster. it's utterly superfluous really to the daily
> trials
> and tribulations of life. it's a luxury to get your software for free.
> it is absolutely the job of users to convince the devs to do what they
> want.
> not to expect devs to line up and take orders.
> > Which if they do not care about users, that also shows they do not
> > care about the entity, organization, or project over all. If users must
> > always convince others, that will not work, and tends to not work for
> > projects who go down that path.
> that is how almost every project works. do you think you can go to a
> kernel dev
> and tell them "i want you do add feature x for me" and they will just go
> do it?
> i can name almost every tingle oss project that if a user just tells a
> developer
> "i want x" and if the dev doesn't like x .. it's not going to happen. even
> if
> user does x and submits a patch .. it doesn't mean the patch is accepted.
> if you believe projects are there to serve their users and just do whatever
> they say.. then that is a very wrong idea. it may apply to projects whose
> only
> goal in life is popularity. that's very few of them and i can tell you
> that it
> almost always ends in tears as the project falls apart technically.
> > Just as devs/volunteers must be motivated to fulfill a users wishes and
> and that is where i think you have it wrong. devs absolutely have no
> requirement to fulfill users wishes. none. no requirement. if they do so
> it's
> them being kind, or perhaps being inspired or motivated by an idea or a
> user.
> unless their goal is pure popularity by saying yes to anything no matter
> what
> it is or what the cost to them just for a bit of popularity.
> > desires. A user has to be motivated to step up. They have to want to,
> > and that can start with wanting to work with given developers. If they
> > see those developers/volunteers are just self serving. They likely will
> > not want to work with them. I see that to often. People with skill, but
> > others avoid them and the distro. Then they use that to drive off
> > others saying others are having that effect. Not realizing its them...
> > Thus despite running others off, project still  suffers.
> what you are describing is developer utterly ignoring users. i never said
> that.
> i did say that listening is good. it does not mean they just do whatever a
> user asks. it goes like this:
> developer has the skills to do x
> user wants x done but can't or won't do it
> user wants developer to donate N hours of their life so they can have x
> it's the users job to convince the developer to give up those N hours
> time is the one resources you CANNOT buy as much of as you like even if you
> have the resources. there are only 24hrs in a day. and everyone's life
> time is
> limited. no one who has grown any wisdom is going to waste hours of their
> limited lives on something they are not convinced is worth it. it's the
> job of
> the user who wants x to convince them that sacrifice is worth it. very
> simple.
> > I am also very much for PAID volunteers. Maybe not full time or part
> > time, but some bounty to help with motivation on things they want no
> > part of or not interested in doing otherwise.
> aaah now PAID means it's a transaction. "in return for X money you will do
> what
> i tel you to do". if that is "fix THIS bug for $X" or "add this feature for
> $Y". it's a deal. an agreed on IN ADVANCE deal. just being a developer who
> works sometimes on project X does not mean it's a deal that "since i donate
> some of my time to project X i must do whatever users tell me to". that is
> absolutely not the contract. a contract is where both parties give up
> something. A gives up money in return from specific work from B. what you
> want
> is "developers give up X time in return for Y happiness of users". that is
> not
> a given assumption. it's a contract that is user wants something has to
> present as a deal. if someone offer me $100,000 to sift through sewerage
> all
> day, every d for a year.. I'll tell them to go away. I don't like the
> deal. if
> they offer $500,000 I will still say the same. If you say "this feature
> will
> make me happy" ... if the feature makes ME unhappy.. i'll tell you to go
> away.
> it's not worth it. you have to CONVINCE me it is. either convince me of the
> sheer happiness it will create *AND* that that happiness is something i
> might
> value, or you have to find some other way... maybe it will support future
> features i might value, or reduce bugs which is somethong i might value
> etc.
> etc... you have to sell it. like any deal.
> > > e doesn't follow the "unix philosophy". quoting it doesn't work. i
> > > believe in efficiency. if it's something that can be controlled by
> > > the same group and thus can get attention and get fixed along with it
> > > and it needs to be integrated (desktop icons require this as does
> > > efficiency) then it should be part of the same process most likely.
> >
> > Maybe it should, E runs mostly on *nix. Most of the world is *nix based
> > now, short of Microsoft. You also end up making someones focus to wide
> > vs narrow. Splitting ones time also  as a result. As things grow it
> > becomes to much for any one.
> simply: no. you may believe differently. i do not think it should. that
> comes
> at a cost i do not like in the slightest. the source is divided cleanly in
> the
> tree by files and directories. even into modules. but i disagree and you're
> going to push against decades of disagreement there. i fully well know the
> unix
> philosophy. i do not like the costs when it comes to something like
> enlightenment. if that is the philosophy for you ... there are other
> desktop
> projects that follow it.
> > I think its better for development, as things can evolve on their own
> > and not be bound to constraints from other things.
> >
> > > e has never been a "unix philosophy thing" for as long as it has
> > > existed. this is not a new thing. it's been the "have 1 process do as
> > > much of your day to day desktop as can be done/is sensible" and fm is
> > > sensible. it's not fundamentally that the shelf or e's menus or
> > > wallpaper handling etc. - if you want the unix philosophy then all of
> > > those move out to processes too. if you like that then kde is
> > > probably good for you. :) gnome used to be until gnome 3... :)
> >
> > What E is today ans has been does not mean it has to be that way
> > tomorrow. Even Apple realized their old OS and ways were garbage, and
> > tossed them for older stuff. Look at the result....
> if you want me involved... it will stay the way it is. it is that
> philosophy
> that leads to things like:
> <benrob0329> I got tiers of it when i3 messed up my Subnautica (that I got
> working in wine pretty decently)
> <benrob0329> *tired
> <benrob0329> It takes less ram and composites, is more flexible and is
> closer
> to a full DE
> <raster> e takes less ram?
> <raster> than i3?
> <benrob0329> i3 with Compton anyways
> <raster> really?
> <benrob0329> My old setup was always over 400 megs
> <raster> you've got to be joking...
> <benrob0329> E is like 255 with rage and terminology open
> <raster> that's... bizarre
> <raster> i'm shocked.
> I never expected E to out-do i3+compton. but it does. over my dead body do
> we
> change direction to nix that advantage.
> > And what has happened since gnome? Less GTK3 dev, and more GTK2 dev and
> > desktops. Gnome did not help itself nor GTK. It just helped XFCE, Mint,
> > and others. That should be a learning lesson there.
> >
> > > > I just do not like any one thing taking out other stuff. The more
> > > > things can be limited and only effect themselves, the better IMHO.
> > >
> > > that is why e has crash recovery... :) but everything being separate
> > > comes with a cost. it's not cheap to have lots of processes.
> > > especially for things you run all the time, like a filemanager (for
> > > the normal icons on desktop).
> >
> > You would not need the crash recovery as such. In the past window
> > managers would crash and other stuff keep chugging along. Also that is
> > IF you can restart E in time. That is not always the case.
> NOT if you are also a compositor. and absolutely not in a wayland world. so
> crash recovery is not even an option. it's a necessary.
> > The thing is I do need the filemanager running all the time. Icons on
> > the desktop could be rendered otherwise. Like what Plasma has done as an
> > example. That is not related to the file manager. Having the file
> > manager running always just for desktop icons seems like a bit much.
> i'm not going to go any more into this. i know other ways of doing it. they
> come at complexity and/or memory and other overhead costs. i am well aware
> of
> the trade-offs. this is the one i chose for e because i am absolutely
> certain
> it's the best/right one.
> > > like arrows pointing in over a directory indicating you are going to
> > > drop the file into the directory?
> >
> > I guess not sure. There are for arrows, one in each corner, and they
> > like point in as part of their animation. Horrible description sorry!
> >
> > I cannot easily replicate that animation. If I drag a file over a
> > folder nothing happens. Just noticed I cannot drag a file into a folder
> > or anything. I am not sure how to trigger that animation, but seems
> > like its some drag and drop. Though I think its happened on regular
> > files not just folders.
> you drag over the folder. the icon becomes hilighted with arrows pointing
> in
> with animation to indicate "dropping INTO this directory". it doesn't
> happen to
> regular files because you cant drop INTO a regular file. i'm staring at ti
> doing this right now... it is how it's pretty much always worked for many
> years
> > > if it's that - how does it get stuck. it's objects in the canvas in
> > > the window.. they are drawn in the window.. so they can't remain if
> > > the window goes. there is no canvas to draw them anymore...
> >
> > You would think so, next time it happens I will take a screenshot and
> > you will see the animation remains. Its odd and annoying.
> what you describe is just absolutely not possible if its the "drop into
> this
> folder" stuff as above. either the description is bad or you mis-remember.
> but
> it's like saying "my pc crashed" ... but the power to it was off. it can't
> crash if it's off. these drop into folder icons cant appear if the canvas
> they
> are in has been deleted. they might leak memory .. that is possible, but
> they
> cant be rendered without the canvas they live in.
> > >so this  doesn't make sense. unless its the desktop files - that
> > >window is the whole fulls screen canvas of the compositor... and i
> > >can't make the arrows stay around at all... if drop is done they go
> > >away. if dnd moves somewhere else they go away.
> >
> > I never full screen most anything that is rare. This tends to happen
> no. it has nothing to do with fullscreening windows. there is a single
> canvas
> covering ALL screens. the entire swet of visible pixels you can see across
> all
> possible screens is a big single canvas. desktop icons live in that canvas
> as
> do e menus, the shelf ... and "image bitmaps" that are windows. the
> windows are
> just "image bitmap objects" in the compositor canvas. the bug "covers all
> screens" canvas has no clue as to the CONTENT. it's just a blob of pixels.
> the
> pixels are rendered to a window/pixmap in x or a buffer in wayland by
> whatever
> owns that window/surface. efm windows are normal windows but the same e
> compositor process also owns the rendering and content of these windows
> too.
> thus it generated this pixel content for itself.
> > for me on accident. I accidentally click on something or drag something
> > and boom, stuck animation. Likely why I cannot replicate. I just know I
> > have seen it more than most other EFM issues.
> >
> > > it's about the only annoyance i find as its just a fast way of nuking
> > > a file rather than right-click .. navigate to delete, then say
> > > "yes"in the dialog or hit del key and say "yes" in dialog. drag and
> > > drop into a trashcan is faster and simpler and... it's undoable (if
> > > done right).
> >
> > The drag into a trashcan/recycle bin to delete is faster. Though I
> > cannot drag and drop into folders now... I thought you were more
> > wanting the extra step of not actually deleting something, but moving
> > it to a intermediary location in case you did not want to delete.
> just wanted less steps.
> > I always took trashcan on windows is oops I deleted that, let me get it
> > back from the trashcan. I kind of like that as a fail safe. Though on
> > KDE seems I had to go clean out those trash folders at times. Then does
> > nothing for you at cli, so....
> the "get it back" is also a nice extra feature but simply having a quick
> action
> that is hard to "do by accident" (hitting the del key is easy to do by
> accident, thus the need for a dialog - also since the delete is not
> undoable it
> should be there. if we had a trashcan where deletes went instead i'd
> remove the
> dialog as deletes are undoable then, but a dnd into a traschan in the
> corner
> of your screen is nice and fast anyway)
> > > > Along the same lines, I cannot select multiple files/folders/icons
> > > > on the desktop. Though maybe related to main menu being left click.
> > > > You
> > >
> > > of course you can. shift and ctrl + click. you cant "rubber-band"
> > > select and that's because this conflicts with the main menu which
> > > activates on mouse down and uses the same click+drag+release style of
> > > use (as well as click+release then another click+release).
> >
> > Yes the "rubber-band" I missed, but figured it was due to main menu. I
> > use the other method, shift + ctrl, selecting the files. Just takes a
> > bit more time. I do not do it that often so some what moot.
> that was why i never wanted to remove the menu on mouse down to make rubber
> banding work. it just wasn't worth it unless you cover your desktop in
> files
> and it's a mess and they need rubber-band selecting... but then my take
> is...
> why did you make a mess like that to begin with? my desktop is mostly for
> a few
> file/dir shortcuts in the corners and maybe some temporary stuff now and
> again... and i think a normal workflow would be similar thus sacrificing
> the
> menu quickness for this i dont think is worth it.
> --
> ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------
> Carsten Haitzler -
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites,!
> _______________________________________________
> enlightenment-devel mailing list
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites,!
enlightenment-devel mailing list

Reply via email to