fxdave

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

afaik, fedora is the testing distro for RHEL. I also felt this way, when a new gnome version released much earlier than for Arch and it had an obvious bug that could be catched with little testing.

And many issues I found in Fedora's bug tracker was auto closed by the new release. Which is quite frequent. Reviewing the bugs is not that frequent.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

Good point. :D

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

well, yes, but for e.g. I wrote a software piece that happened to be only a hotkey daemon. And I could write it with X. Now, hotkey daemons are no longer a separate thing unless the compositor exposes a grab API. Which never going to be in Wayland protocol, because they consider this client server architecture a problem.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

There's hope. Thanks for letting me know.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Now instead of having Wayland covering everything, applications try to cover every desktops. In the good old times, it worked everywhere.

Why does flameshot need to handle different wayland desktops separately? Because simply the protocol doesn't do it's job. It doesn't cover everything. It's indeed not ready.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (6 children)

I think it kills the community. Making a Wayland window manager is so much harder to do than an X one. This monolithic solution solves the problems of Gnome, and KDE developers but less people want to be involved in windowing systems. I'm just being sad for X11, because, although it had nonsense features, it made linux desktop applications compatible with every desktop and we had huge variety of wms, compositors, desktop environments. Personally I'm still on X because of bspwm, but eventually there will be wayland-only features which will slowly kill X.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

there are products that I would buy if I would know they exist but I don't because they don't have enough money to do advertisment. It's inherently an unfair competition. The only ads that I would like to see is a tematical search for all of the buyable products and services.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)
***
that might potentially sell
+++ that is pushed with money
[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

I'm a contractor and I use linux if that counts :D

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

If they want to fight hard, they just add the ads into the stream.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

In a perfect world we wouldn't have ads.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

I liked this discussion. However, I think both of you have different axioms. It's a pro-socialism vs pro-capitalism debate.

In capitalism, we need innovation to create new value. Or you can pollute water to sell water bottles which will have value now. It's up to citizens to decide what to restrict that was publicly available or what to innovate.

In socialism, the innovation is only happening where it needs to happen carefully planned and funded by the government.

I'm rather socialist, so I'd defend it:

Having a software with inability to modify is injustice, It's the same as polluting a water to sell it. Even if we need to pollute the water to sell it, it doesn't justify pollution.

view more: ‹ prev next ›