Unity

Bug #882274
Comment #116

Comment 116 for bug 882274

Revision history for this message

SRoesgen (s-roesgen) wrote on 2011-12-10:

#116

First of all it would be nice to see here some answer to Tal's comment #112, which includes some very good and valid points. ANd I do not see any sane and logical way to ignore the arguments he gives. But where is the answer to the arguments he wrote?

Secondly, concerning kikl's comment (#113):
You think that one should be silent and not complain further if it comes to certain bugs. They are marked as "won't fix" and should not be discussed further. You do not understand the reason for any further discussion taking place?

Well, perhaps some people, like you and the "won't fix" party, should have a look at a couple of launchpad bugs. All of them have in common that they do have problems due to basic design issues . Obviously there was much thought on design in Unity planning, and less thought on more practical aspects.
The most important of these bugs is, in my opinion, bug 727171
(https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/727171).
Reading the comments in bug 857668 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity/+bug/857668) should offer some more interesting insights into the issues triggered by mere design decisions.
Further problems are described in bug 777241 and ... well let me stop here listing them all. Some of them duplicates, some of the smaller issues.

My problem is indeed not a design decision that led to a "won't fix" position concerning certain bugs. I can get used to many design decisions. The problem is
a) how these decisions are communicated
b) on what ideas these decisions are grounded/based

On the way of how these decisions are communicated you should only read Tal's comment #112. It was said that the launcher will not be moveable because it should be tied to the BFB. Now the BFB is part of the launcher but still the decision to not make the launcher movable stays . Ergo the explanation that the BFB and the launcher should be on the same side was a lie. And I am very sorry to put it that way, but to me it is and stays a lie unless I will hear some more thoroughly elaborated explanation to the community why the decision to let it be a "won't fix" bug stays.

So, my complaints are not about a single bug. My complaints deal with communication of problems and design decisions. they deal with the way the community is treated. I am not stupid. We are not stupid. Many people have not forgotten, what the initial explanation to not fix a bug was based on. But we are treated as if we had the memory capabilities of a fly. The community engagement is broken. And that is fact. Obviously we are treated as second class citizens, who need not be informed, who need not be able to have a look at design decisions and general agendas/plans.
It seems that some people forget that the users who use Ubuntu now for many years are those who helped spread the name of the distribution. Those who helped making it popular and who found bugs. Who filed these bugs. Those who talked about usability issues and pointed them out to the developers. And now, these users do not have the right anymore, to have their arguments heard and discussed on a base of equals? Now is suddenly the time when a design decision is always the ultimate argument, even though nobody wants to explain what the design plans are, actually. Even though nobody wants to discuss these design decisions? We, the users, the community, will never be able to come up with logical and valid arguments to discuss a design decisions and bring forward arguments against it, if and when we do now the general agenda and plans behind that decisions.

Well, perhaps some people, like you and the "won't fix" party, should have a look at a couple of launchpad bugs. All of them have in common that they do have problems due to basic design issues . Obviously there was much thought on design in Unity planning, and less thought on more practical aspects. 
The most important of these bugs is, in my opinion, bug 727171
(https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/727171).
Reading the comments in bug 857668 (https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity/+bug/857668) should offer some more interesting insights into the issues triggered by mere design decisions. 
Further problems are described in bug 777241 and ... well let me stop here listing them all. Some of them duplicates, some of the smaller issues.

On the way of how these decisions are communicated you should only read Tal's comment #112. It was said that the launcher will not be moveable because it should be tied to the BFB. Now the BFB is part of the launcher but still the decision to not  make the launcher movable stays .  Ergo the explanation that the BFB and the launcher should be on the same side was a lie. And I am very sorry to put it that way, but to me it is and stays a lie unless I will hear some more thoroughly elaborated explanation to the community why the decision to let it be a "won't fix" bug stays.

So, my complaints are not about a single bug. My complaints deal with communication of problems and design decisions. they deal with the way the community is treated. I am not stupid. We are not stupid. Many people have not forgotten, what the initial explanation to not fix a bug was based on. But we are treated as if we had the memory capabilities of a fly. The community engagement is broken. And that is fact. Obviously we are treated as second class citizens, who need not be informed, who need not be able to have a look at design decisions and general agendas/plans. 
It seems that some people forget that the users who use Ubuntu now for many years are those who helped spread the name of the distribution. Those who helped making it popular and who found bugs. Who filed these bugs. Those who talked about usability issues and pointed them out to the developers. And now, these users do not have the right anymore, to have their arguments heard and discussed on a base of equals? Now is suddenly the time when a design decision is always the ultimate argument, even though nobody wants to explain what the design plans are, actually. Even though nobody wants to discuss these design decisions? We, the users, the community, will never be able to come up with logical and valid arguments to discuss a design decisions and bring forward arguments against it, if and when we do now the general agenda and plans behind that decisions.