From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7956:: with SMTP id r22mr5078929qtt.323.1583251753754; Tue, 03 Mar 2020 08:09:13 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:75d1:: with SMTP id c17mr4099355otl.22.1583251753466; Tue, 03 Mar 2020 08:09:13 -0800 (PST) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 08:09:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.185.239.228; posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.239.228 References: <7dfe88e3-d509-49d1-998c-ce494133890c@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <5f85f415-e599-454d-955c-85199cdad2c2@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: linux desktop in trouble From: Optikos Injection-Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2020 16:09:13 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Received-Bytes: 3472 X-Received-Body-CRC: 1927080708 Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:58164 Date: 2020-03-03T08:09:13-08:00 List-Id: On Tuesday, March 3, 2020 at 4:14:27 AM UTC-6, Leif Roar Moldskred wrote: > Mehdi Saada <00120260a@gmail.com> wrote: > > https://www.zdnet.com/article/the-linux-desktop-is-in-trouble/ > > How easier would it be if they weren't using messed-up tools to begin w= ith, >=20 > Not a lot, honestly. The problems that plague the linux desktop are > political Politics polices policy (both in tech and in government). The so-called = =E2=80=9Cpolitical=E2=80=9D trouble with Linux in particular (and somewhat = so in the BSDs) is that it is difficult to herd the cats to agree on one co= hesive set of =E2=80=A2policies=E2=80=A2. When agreement on the fundamenta= l good versus bad of various policies cannot be achieved, then competing po= litical factions arise to defend their favored set of policies (e.g., syste= md versus some other init; C-centric GTK versus C++-centric Qt; pacman vers= us apt versus snap; Arch distro's rolling release versus Debian distro's pe= riodic release versus Yocto-primordial-not-a-distro roll-your-own-distro). = Then each faction laments & lambastes too much politics when some politica= l movement naturally organically arises that backs a different set of polic= ies. > and architectural, 1) Cathedral of perhaps never-ending refinement of perfection (which risks = bicycle shedding) versus 2) bazar of perhaps the just-barely-good-enough bizarre (which risks ossify= ing too soon in local optima that are far far from global optima) are 2 competing sets of architectural policies that have 2 strongly-held po= litics policing each of them for decades. > not issues of functional correctness The Linux community as a whole cannot agree to one all-the-wood-behind-one-= arrow* intended functionality. Hence the Linux community as a whole cannot= enforce perfect fidelity to one set of functionality because of 2 or more = competing sets of functionality. > or bug-fixing. In the bazar, one person's bug often can be another person's desirableness = in certain use-cases. The answer to this is of course for the cathedral Ada community eventually = to have a separate cathedral OS that is separate from the Linux bazar.