Discussion  - 
 
Warning: Don't talk about background configuration in Gnome!

from: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698544 "Bug 698544 - Background configuration is missing in terminal profile editor"

"Careful everybody, it looks like the gnome devs have gone into full damage control mode. If you mention this bug report anywhere else (reddit, hacker news, pillow talk with your spouse etc) you will be banned: http://i.imgur.com/wCTh0MZ.png"

+GNOME +World of Gnome 
77
35
Max Treskin's profile photoJosé X. Burguer's profile photoSudhir Khanger's profile photoWilliam Jon McCann's profile photo
42 comments
 
People closing bugs this way and people banning user accounts because of unpleasant publicity should publicly apologize or stop making Gnome evil look bad and leave project.
 
How is insulting people making things better?
 
From what I read from the image above, people were using Bugzilla as a forum, which it isn't. That's not proper conduct.
 
Which user was banned and in which bug did they comment?
 
+Martin Holec - saying that this is making GNOME "evil" is way over the top. As +Eufrásio X. Ambrosino already said, Bugzilla is a development tool - it's not there for people to have random discussions or to express personal opinions.

Christian's response could have been more informative, but it's certainly not part of a conspiracy, and I'm sure that there's a good reason for the bug. I'll find out what the story is.
 
+Allan Day I was looking for right word, for this is "making Gnome project look bad". I wasn't referring to any conspiracy.

The core problem is in communication:
* Closing as WONTFIX with only reason as "No."
* Banning users for unpleasant (but truly) publicity (with title stating facts only)
* Deleting comments from bugzilla (can't admins just lock the discussion?)
Allan Day
+
1
2
3
2
 
+Martin Holec - right, so there's a communication issue here which needs to be resolved. However, assuming ill intent when we're still in the dark about what has actually happened is unhelpful. The best thing we can do is wait until all the facts are in before assuming the worst. As I've already said - I will investigate and report back.

The most important principle in online communication is to not assume bad intentions.
 
+Martin Holec do you think this post helps with the communication and perception problem you mentioned? I'm not sure it does. We're all in this together. We need everyone to help pull the weight of testing, coding, and yes telling the world about the value of free software. The world is watching. And it bums me out when we act like this. How about someone take a breath, step back, and look into the issue like a smart person should before going ape shit over one comment in a bug report. 
 
sigh People waste way too much time in front of their computers. That includes me
 
+Allan Day I'm grateful, you are taking look on this. That was the reason I started this discussion in first place. +William Jon McCann I think making this public can help Gnome project members to realize that they may did something wrong and this may lead to some positive change (referring to Alan).

Well, it's not good for PR, but as I'm not involved in that bugreport and I found about this between news in one Linux magazine, I consider myself as a general public.
I don't like to see any open source project to go this low and behave this way in bugzilla. I suppose developers and admins are smarter people than regular bugzilla commenters and they should have more experience with dealing with these things.
PS: I know both of you mean it well, so do I.
 
I really have to agree with Olav. I mean, look at this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5690689
A single feature got removed and now people are comparing GNOME to KDE, talking about Nautilus, and questioning every single aspect of GNOME. This is a fallacy performed by the general public; it's a slippery slope. Just because one feature was removed, and just because one developer wasn't communicative, that doesn't mean GNOME is dying or that all the developers are being ignorant. With the 3.8, GNOME has made a few improvements the community has been asking for. One of them is bringing back the tree view to Nautilus. Even Linus Torvalds has gotten back to using GNOME. I'm not justifying the removal of the feature nor am I defending Christian. I don't think that's the way a person should communicate either. But that doesn't mean that it's the end of the world or that GNOME is adopting a defensive attitude. It's just that the community has been overreacting about this. Yes, aesthetics are important, and yes the feature was loved but many people, but that doesn't mean GNOME will keep losing important features or that all GNOME devs are eccentric. I know for certain that some of them are actually nice, communicative people. I'm starting to believe that people are actually finding it fun to bash GNOME and GNOME lovers these days just for the heck of it.
 
This is really unfortunate. I keep hearing news of how uncooperative and egotistical Gnome developers are. These news might be just rumors but things like above mentioned bug certainly doesn't help the cause. It seems like RESOLVED WON'TFIX is the best answer Gnome developers have for any bug you file. Take a look here https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=699642

It just makes me feel should I even bother using and or support and contribute to Gnome project.
 
+Antoine Saroufim Actually a lot of nice features have been removed. Smalls things that enhance user experience like F3 split view, split menu in two places, wallpapers shall be saved in wallpaper folder in picture folder, all gnome-screenshot pictures should be dumped in picture folder, and many more. Nautilus is becoming the new Windows Explorer.

Features are being release after release. UI is shuffled around every release without any technical explanation. From what i read most explanations are I don't use it = no one uses it = lets remove it kind.

I would love to read more about technical reasons these decisions are being taken. I am subscribed to a bunch of official Gnome mailing lists but there is no discussion in them.
 
+Sudhir Khanger None of those things have anything to do with this. And with that Windows Explorer bit you are clearly trolling. This is not allowed in the GNOME G+ community. Please be cool. (A warning)
 
It would be good if someone could check the bugmaster at gnome.org email and tell me what’s going on with banning me for something I didn’t do.

The last time it got a bit heated up was in the discussion surrounding type-ahead in Nautilus. It was a rocky start but it ended with a very in-depth blog by +William Jon McCann. I’m still a bit miffed that type-ahead is not there anymore but I was very satisfied with Jon’s blog, i.e., taking the concerns of the users seriously and taking the time to explain.

When you saw off a person’s leg, something they are rather loathe to see go, it is better to explain why it can’t be saved beforehand.

Full disclosure, when I wrote to chpe and he managed to brush me off curtly with that silly workaround I followed up with some less than nice emails. Sorry bout that, bro.
 
Apparently, because there are some developers with time and patience to address users irrationally attached to particular features, some users expect every developer to act the same way. This expectation has no ground – while we can agree that the world would be a better place if we all had infinite amounts of energy and patience, that's simply not the case.

The whole GNOME community doesn't deserve your or anyone's bashing because some people can't take a plain "No." for an answer from people who are spending their (free) time and energy in providing them with software.
 
Imagine you gnome developers are the government and we, the users, are the people.

If you implement policies and don’t think you have to communicate the implementation to the people you might run into rioting.

And after all, there’s no governing without people. Unless you get into ivory tower kinds of kingdoms.

And for the record, I didn’t bash anything. Someone moderating bugzilla overstepped his deductive abilities and is blaming me for something I didn’t do. I don’t condone getting the angry mob into this. It’s not making it more likely to change minds about reintroducing features. Which is what I’d like to see.
 
And it’s only irrational attachment if it doesn’t affect you.

I could call Greek or Spanish demonstrations irrational and feel good about it, but I don’t because I cannot know how it is.
eru san
+
2
3
4
3
 
+William Jon McCann , Sudhir wasn't trolling. He posted honest thoughts and criticisms. Trolling is when you post something without good faith and with the sole intention of inciting reactions. Sudhir's comment deserves more respect than being relegated to troll status, and your implied threat of censoring his participation in this community is troubling.
 
I was thinking myself this evening if it is a Sociological experiment in Gnome going on with devs and users. (I guess I'll be warned.) What provoked me to write that here is the comment of +William Jon McCann in response to +Sudhir Khanger  with a 'warning'.
What  +Sudhir Khanger said ,whether relevant here or not, is in general true. Someone can't take 'No' as an answer is problematic, and its also problematic if some moderator can't take a comparison like "is becoming" like something. 

P.S. I'm happy for installing KDE in the last system I was using Gnome Shell 3.8 this evening. 
 
+Tobias Wolf Your analogy with the government is faulty in that citizens fund their elected government. If the government doesn't do what people elect them for they are free to elect a different one.

Leaving aside the fact that individual contributors to GNOME are not funded by users and that alone should grant developers a bit of respect in what they do, I must add, with all due respect, that if a user is unhappy with a particular software he is free to choose a different one that might suit them better. But going into a crusade in the internet jeopardizing a whole community for decisions taken by one or two contributors to the project is escalating the issue beyond anything that could be regarded as constructive.

And just to clarify, I wasn't saying you had bashed anyone. The author of this G+ thread has, as the incinerating title shows.
 
I have to agree with +Tobias Wolf, +Sudhir Khanger and +eru san . This reminds me of an old design proposal made by alba. https://live.gnome.org/Design/Proposals/Customization Gnome dev Andreas responded with a link to a big NO. +Allan Day stepped in with a nice explanation. (Thanks, Allan)

As +Eufrásio X. Ambrosino mentioned, Bugzilla is not a discussion board, the posts were inappropriate. But they weren't uncalled for. I am bitter about many changes and feature removals too as well as the responses/reasoning behind them. However, complaining outright is not helping the community and discourages current and future devs. These guys are committing their free time for us. I'm sure they are not blind to these concerns, they know the repercussions when issuing those commits. If features are sought after they will eventually make it back, in a more efficient/current format. Right now all we can do is voice our wishes kindly and not demand action like unhappy paying customers.
 
+Michael Heyns apologies if I was brief in that case. I'm more than happy to discuss my view on specific design proposals in depth with you or anyone else (unless I'm busy, I suck terribly at multitasking).
 
+Andreas Nilsson Thank you very much, Andreas. The user seemed to have put a lot of effort into his/her proposal and the brief response was reason for concern at the time. I remember a similar community debate occuring on Worlfofgnome.org.
 
I'm really upset with the direction +GNOME has taken. From being the most loved DM to one of the most hated one. It's like they are on a highway to hell. I sincerely hope that other devs will find who the "real" offenders are in the aforementioned bug (and maybe warn them). I always thought that developer-friendliness and support was some of the things +GNOME offers. I don't think after this kind of responses from devs, they don't deserve to get better response than this from the community. After it's a free world.
 
GNOME is now a conspiracy by Apple or Microsoft to destroy Linux.
Allan Day
+
1
0
1
0
 
As promised, I’ve spent a bit of time investigating what has happened with this issue. I’ll start with a few clarifications on where things stand right now.

I want to emphasise that the bug report referred to in the original post is publicly available online, including the majority of the comments that have been posted there. It has not been removed, and there are plenty of differing opinions expressed there. A small number of comments were removed by a moderator due to inappropriate behaviour, and a Bugzilla account has been suspended. It should be said that this is an extremely unusual action for GNOME Bugzilla administrators to take, and that the decision will be reviewed.

A Bugzilla account is only ever closed after repeated behaviour which violates the GNOME Code of Conduct. This is a basic set of rules that we expect all GNOME community members to follow in order to ensure that GNOME is a constructive place for our contributors to work. The GNOME community hugely values constructive feedback and collaboration with our users. However, we do not tolerate personal attacks or insults on GNOME development channels.

That said, some background about the transparency issue in the terminal: after doing some investigating, it seems that this was removed as a part of a much larger clean up of the gnome-terminal code base. This modernisation effort is much needed and it should be remembered that the terminal has an old and complicated code base. Background transparency was also known to cause a range of performance issues, including slowness and memory leaks.

Given the number of active terminal developers, the need to clean up the code base and known bugs with background transparency, it was decided that the resources were not available to keep background transparency and keep the quality to the required level.

I understand that some users are disappointed by the disappearance of this feature, but I hope that they understand that this decision was made to enable other improvements to the terminal code, and that the decision will lead to general improvements in the long run.

I'll end by saying that, while Christian’s initial response could have been better, he has given detailed responses about this in private,  and I suspect that he was simply tired of the issue. I'll also add that he is a major GNOME contributor who puts a huge amount of effort into the terminal, and who has single-highhandedly closed many thousands of bugs in his time.
 
"OK, I figured out what happened. It wasn't ideal in terms of commits. So, we have an old configuration system GConf, and we replaced it with our new one, GSettings, for N reasons. GSettings was missing a feature for gnome-terminal to implement, so it went without GSettings for a long time, until the 3.8 cycle, when we ported it over with a workaround. The port wasn't 100% complete, so it landed with the intention of adding feature parity, like with terminal transparency support.

However, after asking our team, we decided it wasn't worth it keeping the support code around for terminal transparency, and dropped it.
It's an unfortunate thing that happened where the reasoning wasn't relayed entirely in commit messages, and you're right -- it was dropped in a seemingly unrelated commit. But that's after intentions changed -- a broken port to new tech with the intention to fix it, then that changed, and thus it got dropped under the guise of "Remove dead code"

http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1e4p53/gnome_37_removes_terminal_transparency_closing/
eru san
+
1
2
1
 
So...it looks like the GNOME guys have censored a post about censorship? It's no longer showing up in the GNOME community feed.
 
+eru san - I'm not aware of any of the moderators having done anything to the thread. I'll ask around.
 
+Allan Day if some of the devs would have given explanation to what happened somewhat like +Jack Waterworth did here, this wouldn't have been escalated this much over here and there. I would repeatedly say that No is never an answer unless you back it up with a reason (valid or not).

I'm aware that everyone will not have the time for a lengthy 'why I did this' kind of replies.

So maybe all Christian had to do is to blog it somewhere and give the link of it in bugzilla. Or else better: put that in the freaking commit message.

"reverted bg transparency

This is removed due to so-and-so reason"

is far more legible and accepted (by me at least) than

"Remove dead code"

#thinkingoutloud
 
+Avinash Ananth Narayan R - I don't think anyone is suggesting that "No" was a good response. ;)

That said, that kind of comment is extremely uncommon, especially for Christian. I think he was probably just tired of explaining the decision after all the discussion that had gone on.

We're all human, and we all get frustrated sometimes. I don't think that warrants a witch hunt. Christian has closed over 4000 bugs during his work on GNOME, and we've now corrected the issue and provided the necessary background, so let's not get too hung up over a single comment.
 
Note, it's not a single person issue, problems stated in this discussion are more general and from time to time they happen again and again in Gnome lands. I'm not saying this doesn't occur in other FLOSS communities, but it really matters how they handle it internally and how frequent these misconducts are.
 
+Martin Holec - I work in GNOME Bugzilla every day. I've been doing it for about 4 years. I can barely think of another example like this.

You say that this is happens "again and again", yet that is completely contrary to my experience and the experience of others who work with the GNOME community.

This is an exceptional case; don't make it bigger than reality.
 
I find this condescending attitude, plus the gratuitious generalization towards the GNOME project, to be a major drag of my motivation to spend any of my time in GNOME. You guys should think about that angle too when you start telling us contributors how to do this or that instead of, for instance, becoming a constructive part of the community in matters that could help us to avoid these misunderstandings. Being inciendiary is easier, of course, but by being so you are displaying the same lack of patience and understanding you take from granted from contributors.
 
+Claudio Saavedra I understand your view here. My post above was kind of conclusion. I think we don't need to discuss our stands (or angles) here, because they are different by nature - you are Gnome developer, but I'm not.
I think in broader light users can be seen as contributors as well. Starting with promoting Gnome among others, helping other users or giving their best efforts to write a comprehensive bug reports. Maybe that's the basic idea that each Gnome contributor should realize. Think about each closed unfixed bug as reverted commit.*
Having Code of Conduct is nice beginning, but what most of humans remembers better are *examples, role models, stories, precedents and ideas than laws.
+Allan Day Your help is very appreciated. I like that you took the investigation from inside. I hope, next time someone from inside of project will take good care of issue same as you did before it goes to outside community.
Add a comment...