Message: previous - next
Month: February 2013

Re: [trinity-users] K menu organisation in Trinity

From: JB <yochanon@...>
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:13:11 -0600
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 20:32:42 -0500
Alexandre Couture <ac586133@...> wrote:

>  > Choice is bad. Or rather, having *too much choice* is bad. And it must be
>  > *informed* choice. This is not informed choice.
> > 
> > Too much choice is called *complication*, and it is bad for business, it is bad
> > for mental health, bad for users, and bad for developers.
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> > Alexandre has added an option to Trinity to support another option. Has he
> > written the documentation to explain that option? Has he written the tests to
> > ensure that all Trinity software works correctly whichever option the user
> > chooses?
> > 
> > I expect not. So by adding this choice, Trinity now is probably a little worse,
> > not better. A little worse documented, a little worse tested.
> > 
> > Or rather, I should say he has added an option to *his* version on Trinity. Now
> > I have uncertainty and doubt, not choice. If I install Trinity, which Trinity
> > will I get? Will it be Trinity that feels like KDE 3 with Konqueror, or Trinity
> > that feels like KDE 4 with Dolphin? What other bits have been removed? How will
> > I know before I spend my valuable time and effort downloading and installing it?
> > 
> > Where is my choice if I do not know what I will get?
> > 
> > Alexandre, if you want to fork Trinity to make a mutant hybrid that's half KDE 3
> > and half KDE 4, then give people real choice by giving it a new name and not
> > claim it is Trinity. Or you are welcome to try to convince the Trinity developer
> > team to accept his modifications, so that they apply to Trinity no matter where
> > I get it from. But having Trinity be different depending on who you get it from
> > is a *bad thing*, and it speaks badly for the Trinity project.
> > 
> > If I have a bad experience with Trinity, is it because Trinity is broken, or
> > because I've installed a bad modification? If I recommend Trinity to colleagues
> > and friends, and they install "the wrong version", will they try again with "the
> > right version", or will they just dismiss Trinity as broken and me as having no
> > credibility?
> > 
> > -- 
> > Steven
> Well that's getting a real joke! Once again!
> I am not a software developer. I don't know how to make a computer program. And
> you tell me that I have added an option to TDE? Certainly not.
> It is funny that those who always write against what I say are never here on this
> mailing list to help users who are experiencing problems. They are not TDE devs
> too. They are only here to complain about what I say, in a non-constructive way.
> They are not making things available for TDE.
> An example of a feature added to TDE that was not in KDE 3.5.10 is the compositor.
> Has it broken all TDE and maked the users all upside down like what your are doing
> right now? Of course, not at all. It was just a nice addition to TDE and some
> persons have worked hard to implement it, so whe should all thank those who want
> to improve TDE in any way.
> -Alexandre

  I think you're kind of missing the point of Trinity. It was to make it remain
  KDE3-like, which meant it did *NOT* have all the useless crud *ADDED* to it which
  turned it into the abortion known as KDE4. Adding more crud to Trinity doesn't
  make it or keep it Trinity. Making the old code work on the newer versions of
  linux OS's is the trick to having Trinity be a great DE...*NOT* adding and adding
  and adding more and more 'stuff'. Trinity should run nice and fast - like KDE3 used
  to, but when more and more stuff is added to it, there's no way it can possibly
  run as fast as a leaner DE. I'm sure the dev's are having a hard enough time just
  with the old code making it work, much less adding more junk to it and still make
  it lean and mean like the old KDE3 was.

  It's great you want to help and add things, but the way you're going about it
  isn't in the spirit of keeping it Trinity, IMHO.

  Oh, and using that lame excuse that those who aren't 'contributing' aren't worth
  spit is, well...lame. There's many thousands upon thousands of people who wish
  they could, but just don't have the skills or the means to learn the skills to
  help. Even just writing help files, one can't be a simpleton because it has to be
  written correctly, not thrown together by someone like me who doesn't know how to
  write correctly enough to make the files not look like linux is made by and for
  simpletons. It's a pet peave of mine when people use that lame excuse to try and
  shame others into not speaking their minds about something and it's wrong when
  people use it. Opinions of things going on around them and things that affect them
  are what drives us as humans, not belittling or telling others their opinions suck
  because they're not doing as much to a project as you are.

Man is a religious animal. He is the only religious animal. He is the only
animal that has the True Religion -- several of them.  -Mark Twain