Talk:GNOME: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 12:26, 23 December 2024

GNOME Panel was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 28 March 2024 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into GNOME. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the GNOME article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 3 months

GNOME was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 3, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
November 14, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
November 27, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted
December 1, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
Current status: Delisted good article

Linux Top‑importance

	Linux portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linux, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linux on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinuxWikipedia:WikiProject LinuxTemplate:WikiProject LinuxLinux
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as High-importance).

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology

Software: Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

JavaScript Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject JavaScript, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to JavaScript, and to the development of user scripts for use on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JavaScriptWikipedia:WikiProject JavaScriptTemplate:WikiProject JavaScriptJavaScript
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

C/C++ Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject C/C++, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of C and C++ topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.C/C++Wikipedia:WikiProject C/C++Template:WikiProject C/C++C/C++
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Computer graphics Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer graphics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computer graphics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer graphicsWikipedia:WikiProject Computer graphicsTemplate:WikiProject Computer graphicscomputer graphics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Extensions and theming" section

The extensions api and the new theming api should be mentioned. Wiktorpyk (talk) 12:26, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{afd-merged-from|GNOME Panel|GNOME Panel|28 March 2024}}
 {{Skip to talk}}
 {{Talk header|search=yes}}
@@ Line 19: / Line 20: @@
 |topic=Engtech
 }}
-{{WikiProject banner shell|1=
+{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|collapsed=yes|1=
-{{WikiProject Linux|class=B|importance=top}}
+{{WikiProject Linux|importance=top}}
-{{WikiProject Computing |class=B |importance=Mid |free-software=yes |free-software-importance=high |software=yes |software-importance=Mid }}
+{{WikiProject Computing |importance=Mid |free-software=yes |free-software-importance=high |software=yes |software-importance=Mid }}
+{{WikiProject Technology }}
+{{WikiProject Software |importance=Mid}}
+{{WikiProject JavaScript |importance=Low}}
+{{WikiProject C/C++ |importance=Low}}
+{{WikiProject Computer graphics |importance=Low}}
 }}
 {{To do}}
@@ Line 34: / Line 40: @@
 }}
+== "Extensions and theming" section ==
-== Confusion concerning SteamOS ==
+The extensions api and the new theming api should be mentioned. [[User:Wiktorpyk|Wiktorpyk]] ([[User talk:Wiktorpyk|talk]]) 12:26, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
-[[SteamOS]] has recently been added and removed from the list of operating systems that use GNOME by default. I believe the confusion results from the fact that older versions of SteamOS used GNOME, but SteamOS 3.0 uses KDE Plasma. We should come to a consensus on whether to include it or not to avoid [[WP:EW]]. [[User:Nonoesimposible|NoNoEsImposible]] ([[User talk:Nonoesimposible|talk]]) 11:55, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
-:I personally would use it with "SteamOS 2.0" while waiting to know what will happen to SteamOS 2.0 machines. I don't believe there's currently information about whether or not those machines will be able to upgrade to SteamOS 3.0 (Debian vs Arch base). [[User:Lionirdeadman|- Lionirdeadman]] ([[User talk:Lionirdeadman|talk]]) 19:54, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
-== The split with the GNU project needs a date ==
-{{ping|Lionirdeadman}} And here we are. {{Diff|GNOME|1044950469|1044769860|Your last revert|diffonly=yes}} argues that it is only a detail that the split with the GNU project has been formalized in 2021 – since the relationship between GNOME and GNU was allegedly cold already – and because of that Wikipedia should not document the year when the split formally happened. My arguments against your positions are the following:
-# The split has still been formalized in 2021
-# We are dealing with two parties here, and while it might have been in the GNOME Foundation's mind already ten years ago (or event twenty years ago for what matters) that they did not want to be part of the GNU project anymore, we cannot say the same about the GNU project, which as far as I know has always considered GNOME as a GNU project until 2021 – and they are not to blame, GNU started the GNOME project and nobody told them anything before this year
-# The GNOME ''Foundation'' and the GNOME ''community'' are two different things. And while the former might have distanced itself from the GNU project already long ago, a large part of the community had absolutely no idea and has learned about it only recently; and by reading what GNOME stated on their various websites even newcomers would just consider GNOME as a GNU project until 2021
-# I am one of those who was convinced that GNOME was a GNU project – because that's what they have always written – until I saw that the Executive Director of the GNOME Foundation signed (wrote?) [https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ a very weird letter against Stallman] – where the latter is accused of horrible things which are insinuated but not reported, so I still don't know what Stallman is guilty of – and started to twit things against the GNU project out of the blue ([https://mobile.twitter.com/gnome/status/1382361929981825024 #1], [https://twitter.com/nmcgovern/status/1382360647464316931 #2])
-# If this had been a divorce between two persons, would Wikipedia mention the date when the first fights started to appear or the date when the divorce was formalized?
-We need to bring back the year. --[[Special:Contributions/89.242.98.153|89.242.98.153]] ([[User talk:89.242.98.153|talk]]) 03:21, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
-:I just want to clarify that I don't think that Wikipedia shouldn't document the year that it was brought to the public but rather that this date alone would bring misinterpretations. My argument is more so centered around the fact that GNOME was *never* part of the GNU Project as they have never used GNU infrastructure, made their own governance structure, never were under GNU governance and never gave copyright to the FSF as all other GNU Projects have to do to my knowledge.
-:# The "split" was simply made more clear because the FSF has refused to remove GNOME from their list of software.
-:# GNU did not start the GNOME Project. Frederico Mena and Miguel De Icaza started the GNOME Project, neither of which are part of GNU and have never been as far as I know. De Icaza even founded Ximian/Helix Code in 1999 for GNOME development before GNOME Foundation was founded in 2000. Notice that neither of these were ever made with intent to be part of GNU. Furthermore, a look at the announcement from [https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-list/1997-August/msg00123.html 1997] shows no mention of being part of GNU Project.
-:# I think that for the purposes of the GNOME page, trying to show community opinions is not the right way, it would become quite difficult to parse if we started doing that therefore official positions from GNOME Project should be taken instead. While I agree that websites from GNOME did not reflect the reality of the situation, I believe that these are errors over time.
-:# GNOME Foundation has had issues with GNU Project for a much longer time, I'm not going to talk about the Open Letter as it is not relevant.
-:# I think a problem with trying to give a date is that this is ambiguous in meaning (considering that they did not use GNU infra, governance or do copyright assignment) and a lot of discussions have been done mostly outside of the public view which makes it hard to cite.
-:
-:I will bring up these things to people who know better than myself as to try to clarify this. Note that this is written with my personal knowledge of the situation so I may have done mistakes. [[User:Lionirdeadman|- Lionirdeadman]] ([[User talk:Lionirdeadman|talk]]) 16:22, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
-::{{ping|Lionirdeadman}}
-::* {{tq|My argument is more so centered around the fact that GNOME was *never* part of the GNU Project as they have never used GNU infrastructure, made their own governance structure, never were under GNU governance never gave copyright to the FSF as all other GNU Projects have to do to my knowledge.}} That is not a good argument. Most GNU projects belong simply spiritually to GNU, and both developers and the core of GNU hackers are happy with it; these present themselves still as GNU projects (see [[GIMP]], [[Denemo]], etc.) – GNOME used to be one of them. And even the most involved projects have their independence (see [[GCC]], [[GNUnet]], [[GNU Guix]]). That is exactly one of the differences with the GNOME Foundation; while the latter is a foundation the former is an informal federation of hackers. There is a formal foundation also behind the GNU project, but it is not called "The GNU Foundation", as in GNOME, it is called "Free Software Foundation". And the reason is very simple: its goal is not the GNU project but free software (and lately mostly free hardware, like mobile phones). Talking about "the GNU infrastructure" is way more vague than talking about the GNOME infrastructure. Also many GNU projects don't ask for the giveaway of the copyright, but apply a shared copyright (see GNUnet).
-::* {{tq|The "split" was simply made more clear because the FSF has refused to remove GNOME from their list of software.}} Asking to remove GNOME from the list of GNU software (while GNOME was still presenting itself as a GNU project) ''was already a formal split''. So the split pre-dates a bit the twits I quoted, and happened in that very moment in which GNOME asked to be removed from the GNU projects – if I am not wrong we are still talking about 2021.
-::* {{tq|GNU did not start the GNOME Project. Frederico Mena and Miguel De Icaza started the GNOME Project}} That is exactly how GNU projects begin. Someone writes a program (for themselves, a friend, the spouse, or whatever), and then, ''when it is already mature'', '''applies''' to be listed among the GNU packages. Often GNU refuses to accept software. Other times they accept it. Who applied on behalf of GNOME, that I have no idea. What I know is that it was GNOME more than GNU the one who cared the most to be considered as a GNU project, at least for many of the early years.
-::* {{tq|I think that for the purposes of the GNOME page, trying to show community opinions is not the right way.}} We don't have to show community opinions, but only formal facts.
-::* {{tq|GNOME Foundation has had issues with GNU Project for a much longer time}} They didn't divorce for a long time either. A formal act is still a formal act. Without the last events it was perfectly possible to imagine – like two years ago – that these issues would be solved over time and the two parties would find again a comomn goal. Now that is definitely harder to imagine. So something did happen in 2021.
-::* {{tq|I think a problem with trying to give a date is that this is ambiguous in meaning and a lot of discussions have been done mostly outside of the public view which makes it hard to cite.}} I have no doubts, every breakup needs its time of reflection. But being a private discussion is not just an insignificant detail, it is one of the decisive points here. The public (and GNU, and GNOME itself) still referred to GNOME as a GNU project until things have become formal very recently.
-::* {{tq|(considering that they did not use GNU infra, governance or do copyright assignment)}} See my previous answer.
-:: --[[User:Grufo|Grufo]] ([[User talk:Grufo|talk]]) 17:38, 18 September 2021 (UTC)