On 02/16/2013 06:56 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
On 15/02/2013 23:22, jonc wrote:
On 02/15/2013 05:28 AM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
On 14/02/2013 23:26, Jim wrote:
Fedora 18
Why for HEAVENS did they change the custom partitioning in F18 from
the
F17 and previous versions ?
Is there a Tutorial for Custom Partitioning for Fedora 18 ?
Perhaps in the documentation? This
<http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora/18/html/Installation_Guide/s1-diskpartsetup-x86.html>
takes you to the partitioning section in the middle of the Anaconda
docs. There is also a help file available in the application.
Like it or not, they had their reasons
<http://ohjeezlinux.wordpress.com/2013/02/05/anaconda-retrospective/>
for the change.
Most of the time, at least in the past 5 years or so, I've been
finding that changes have been made for the sake of change, not an
actual need for the change (Gnome 3, anyone?). I'm not saying Fedora
is alone in this - most distros have suffered similar mis-decisions by
the developers. A lot of it also feeds from upstream where maintainers
are far more interested in pursuing their on pet feature sets than
providing a long term reliable, well understood and well supported
code base.
Not that this is "wrong" per se - you cannot expect volunteers
maintaining OSS projects to pursue anything but their own project
goals, and this must be respected. It is, however, much less
justifiable with important projects that are heavily sponsored by
corporations.
Gordan
Well, FOSS is certainly developer-centric. But, then, so is all
software creation. By definition, users don't make software, so
developers either make what they want or make what they think users will
like.
I spent several years intermediating between users and developers trying
to design and build new software for those users. Most users are rather
inarticulate, if not useless, when it comes to telling developers about
the ways they think software could help them. Typically, they complain
about the faults of their current software, so the developers think all
that's necessary is a shinier, tweaked and debugged version of the
current stuff. Often, though, the users have simply adopted themselves
to the design faults and limitations of that software. They assume its
capabilities define the range of capabilities any software can provide.
It's my impression that the Gnome team decided, in effect, that the
underpinnings of Gnome 2 code were too old, too buggy, too inadequate
and too rickety to permit use in continued development. Were they
right? Who knows, in the abstract. But, it was their code, not our code.
I also believe one reason they've reduced the feature set in Gnome 3 is
to reduce future maintenance demands. After all, it's not like they
number in the hundreds.
I'm finding Gnome Shell on Fedora 18, with the addition of a few
extensions, to be very nice and quite speedy. I especially like the
dynamic work space feature. I can move between open spaces/apps with a
single click. I can't do that on Gnome 2 or any other so-called
traditional panel-based GUI.
To each his or her own, of course. Personal tastes and choices don't
project well on everyone else's reality, though. Otherwise, I'd be
ranting about how KDE and XFCE are the result of miscreant developers
possessed of no appreciation of real user needs.
--
users mailing list
users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
