On 08/04/2014 01:55 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Apr 2014 21:53:49 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>
>> When we updated all our stuff to OpenSUSE 12.2, we found that it comes
>> with GNOME 3, which is basically just like GNOME 2, except designed to
>> only work on a Tablet.
>
> Well, no, that wasn't the design goal (as I understand it), but I use
> GNOME3 daily, and I like its minimalistic approach.

Heck, in OpenSUSE 13.1, they even took away the scrollbar and replaced 
it with a page-selector widget. The entire design seems focused on 
touchscreens.

> The only thing I absolutely hate about it is when a plugin dies, it
> crashes the entire session with an "Oh, no!  Something happened!" and an
> option to log out.  I would at /least/ like to save documents I have open
> before being forced to log out.
>
> Whoever thought that was a good idea spent far too much time dealing with
> systems where everything runs in ring 0 and an abend was generally
> considered a good thing.  We're past those days now, and being able to
> recover, say, a running virtual machine might just be a /good/ thing.

I enjoy the way that you can enable and disable "GNOME shell 
extensions". Except that an "extension" is merely some code that patches 
the live JS code that powers the shell. When you disable one, THE 
EXTENSION is responsible for undoing all of its changes. If it does this 
incorrectly, then "disabling" a plugin does not put the system back into 
its original state.

Hell, it's trivially possible to write an extension that installs itself 
in the Init() function, and has EMPTY Enable() and Disable() functions! 
In which case, enabling or disabling the extension is no-op.

People, THIS IS NOT SENSIBLE DESIGN!

Designing a system that is completely undocumented, yet can only be 
extended by violating encapsulation to monkey-patch live code while it's 
still running is a Bad Idea.

Designing a system where the plugin author is responsible for enabling 
and disabling correctly is a Bad Idea.

Designing a system that's powered by an untyped psuedo-OO scripting 
language originally intended for web development rather than desktop 
applications is... questionable at best. :-P

Utterly failing to document one single shred of this is... exasperating 
in the extremes!

Still, we found that once we (*cough* I *cough*) spent a few months 
patching the code, we could get it to hobble along more or less how we 
wanted. OTOH, if Win8 doesn't work how you like... suck it?

Post a reply to this message