Pidgin Controversy Triggers Fork 1104
paleshadows writes "Pidgin, the premier multi-protocol
instant messaging client, has been forked. This is the result of a heated, emotional, and
very interesting debate over a controversial new feature: As of
version 2.4, the ability to manually resize the text input area has
been removed; instead, it automatically resizes depending on how much
is typed. It turns out that this feature, along with the uncompromising
unwillingness of the developers to provide an option to turn it off,
annoys the bejesus of very many users.
One
comment made by a Professor that teaches "Collaboration in an Open
Source World" argued that 'It's easy to see why open source developers could develop dogmas. [...]
The most dangerous dogma is the one exhibited
here: the God feature. "One technological solution can meet
every possible user-desired variation of a feature." [...]
You [the developers] are ignoring the fan base with a dedication to your convictions
that is alarmingly evident to even the most unobservant of followers,
and as such, you are demonstrating that you no longer deserve to be in
the position of servicing the needs of your user base.'" Does anyone besides me find this utterly ridiculous?
Pigeons (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Pigeon controversies triggering forks is nothing.
For a fork, you'd have had to go all the way to Soviet Russia, but a dart was close enough to prove that In Moderately Liberal Seattle, dart triggers pigeon controversy [nwsource.com].
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously though. Pidgin and its predecessor Gaim are forked every 6 months or so. It's what happens when developers enforce their petty "HIG guidelines" over common sense. Someone please tell me why it is necessary to forbid the user from resizing a window or widget that was previously resizeable. The preferences window is another one. There's no reason at all that they had to set it as nonresizeable, and occasionally it pisses me off enough to port
Re:Pigeons (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I work nearby where the bus-garage is located, and there is an absolutely huge amount of seagulls that flock to the parking lot because it is shiny smooth blacktop and they apparently are so stupid that they think it is water...
Anyway, they used to employ someone to scatter the birds so that the buses could leave and enter without the seagulls being crushed. The poor guy had to come out in a bee-keeper suit, because the little bas
Re:Pigeons (Score:5, Funny)
As one of my relatives is^Wwas a seagull I can explain this behaviour.
It's actually fairly simple: When seagulls rest they normally float on the water.
They don't have to be scared of "big boxy things" approaching because normally that
would be a ship and that would just gently push them out of the way - not even disturbing
their sleep.
Therefore seagulls have never had a need to develop defensive strategies
against human land vehicles - or anything else that's walking on wheels.
To make matters worse the brain of a seagull is really small
and their mental abilities are somehwat limited, akin to a 0.5MHZ CPU.
Thus, you are probably right that their small mind falsely classifies the blacktop as "water" at first.
"Big boxy thing approaching at 2MPH" is not so slow anymore when your single thread of execution
is blocked with sorting out the unfamilar sensory input: "Why is this water so hard?"
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:This is why people prefer commercial software (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What a load of bollocks, you need look no further than Office 12 for an example of a commercial developer losing their way and creating a UI feature that most users are not going to feel is a benefit (the ribbon). Arguably, Vista is the same. It's unlikely that Vista is going to fail as a commercial product, and even l
GET OFF MY LAUN! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:GET OFF MY LAUN! (Score:4, Funny)
Developers and User Interfaces don't tend to get along well; you need to go out on the street and grab a couple of people wearing matching outfits and get them to draw your UI on a napkin or something.
Re:GET OFF MY LAUN! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Anyone using such a construct in the future without my permission shall be sued. I named it, I own it.
Re:GET OFF MY LAUN! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:GET OFF MY LAUN! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And people wonder why KDE is so popular despite so many companies officially supporting only Gnome.
Is there a technical reason not to allow both ways (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is there a technical reason not to allow both w (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Tcha. Then make it a compile time option and let the people who feel that strongly about the issue enable or disable it at build time. The can stick the instructions in the FAQ.
I really can't see the point of refusing to budge over such a trivial issue.
Re:Is there a technical reason not to allow both w (Score:5, Insightful)
But if you look at the images in the linked page, there definitely appear to be some usability concerns here.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's an issue with maintainability though, not usability. The program can be just as usable with a compile time option in there. More so, since it doesn't annoy all those people who find the feature doesn't suit their work patterns.
And really, there's no reason it has to even be a mai
Re:Is there a technical reason not to allow both w (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is there a technical reason not to allow both w (Score:5, Funny)
I have. Google Talk.
And I hate it. It drives me nuts, actually. I hate it so much I stopped using the "official" Google Talk client and switched to Pidgin.
Joke's on me.
Re:Is there a technical reason not to allow both w (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Is there a technical reason not to allow both w (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
However there's also a class of users that finds the whole thing stupid and annoying and inconsistent. For one, UI elements aren't expected to change t
Re:Implement it as a plugin! (Score:5, Informative)
More options are always better! (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, sure, forking a project means that we now have fewer developers concentrating on a product than before, but it's for the best because now we'll have two IM clients that are nearly identical except for some minor things. All because some programmers are egotistical assholes!
The Open Source world needs to grow the fuck up. More options aren't always better - more good options are better, more options for the sake of having more options or because you can't learn to play nicely with the other kids are stupid.
Re:More options are always better! (Score:5, Insightful)
If the kid with the ball doesn't want to play fair, you either cry about it, or get your own ball and play like reasonable people. These folks did the latter.
Re:More options are always better! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That's why Open-Source fails on the desktop (Score:5, Insightful)
Too many people who think they know better than the end-users, and too much work being done by lots of people on different, competing projects. You need to unite your efforts, not work against each others. This fork is just another proof (and WTH is with that "premier multi-protocol instant messaging client" remark? Nobody uses that on Windows and Mac OS X).
The whole KDE vs Gnome debate is one of the things that keeps Windows on PCs.
Posted as AC because of Linux and OSS zealots.
Re:That's why Open-Source fails on the desktop (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Anecdotal evidence isn't a strong argument, unless you only wanted to prove that AC wrong.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why do people think linux should replace OSX or Windows ? That's the whole point it isn't OSX or Windows. I hate people who treat it like a cult, or a company. It isn't that. It's purpose is to evolve based on the need of it's users. Thus the different varieties. This allows people to choose based on there specific application. Something you cannot do with OSX or Windows, or Solaris, or HPUX.
steps down from soap box, and seeks cover
Re:That's why Open-Source fails on the desktop (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ok Windows I can understand.
OSX? No, I can't understand. An OS in which you have to hack the FUCKING KERNEL (or something almost equally low level) to change the color of the gumdrop buttons on the windows? And when you do this and you install a system upgrade your Mac can end up unbootable?
Apple are downright *hostile* to end-user customisation.
Re:That's why Open-Source fails on the desktop (Score:4, Insightful)
[ ] Focus follows mouse
[ ] MacOS style menus
Great, each of those might be something that is wanted by the user. However if you switch them both on you end up with an unusable application, since the moment you move your mouse into the direction of the menu you lose focus. You simply can't combine both.
Now as long as both of these options are in a single application, you might be able to catch that, but what if they are in different application? One application choses 'Mac menus' by default and your window manager uses focus follows mouse by default. The user will have good fun trying to figure out why the menu always disappears when he tries to reach it.
Now this is just an example, but options can always have unintended side effects. And just because option X works and option Y work, that doesn't mean that X and Y work together. Which is the reason why one should try to keep options to a minimum, so that the behavior of the application stays predictable.
That all is of course doesn't mean that all options should be removed, some are important, but one really need to be careful about which to keep and just keeping everything will just lead to a mess.
All Too Often (Score:5, Insightful)
And when it comes time to remove it they defend it. They may even realize that they were wrong thinking everyone would love it. But they just don't want to give up that code that cost them so much time to figure out and write.
Coding for several days only to realize that you need to throw everything you wrote away is one of the hardest skills for a developer to learn
Re: (Score:2)
Or at the very least, fellow programmers who work on the same project?
Re:All Too Often (Score:5, Funny)
when i want an actual user's opinion, i'll beat it out of him
come on, every developer's thunk it at least once...
Murdering your darlings (Score:4, Informative)
You develop a scene with blood, sweat and tears, and then realize it's baggage and there's a better way, and shorter/more compact is always better.
It hurts but it beats the alternative, which is reduced quality of writing.
How to unfork: (Score:5, Insightful)
[X] Allow resizing of chat input area
Re:How to unfork: (Score:5, Insightful)
[X] Allow resizing of chat input area
[X] Automatically control chat input window size
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
(_) Allow resizing of chat input area
(_) Automaticaly control chat input window size
(_) Neither
(X) Both
Oh, jesus - this sets new stupidity levels (Score:2)
Find *what* utterly ridiculous? (Score:5, Insightful)
Depends on what you mean. Do I find it ridiculous that developers are ignoring a sizable portion of their userbase and implementing a feature that many people would like to disable? Yes, I find it ridiculous. Not terribly surprising, but ridiculous nonetheless.
Do I find it ridiculous that it's causing a project to fork? Not particularly. This is supposed to be the one of the greatest advantages of open source; if you don't like the way people play, you can pick up the pieces and start your own game. Silly me, I had secretly hoped that the threat of something like this happening would keep software like pidgin from ignoring its user base. Guess I was wrong.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What, you mean like a choice between:
Man, no wonder Windows has such a tiny market share, with all that consumer-unfriendly choice!
The debate is now over... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Still need more?
Re: (Score:2)
Google cache link to pidgin bugzilla page (Score:3, Informative)
And here is a link to the fork: (Score:3, Informative)
Jeez.. (Score:2)
I personally think that an option to turn it off would be nice, but come on, it's not a big deal.
Wow (Score:2)
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
This feature sounds Gnomish (Score:4, Insightful)
Great minds think alike (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Another bad decision by the pidgin folk (Score:5, Informative)
Why do idiots do this? (Score:2)
Present the positions (Score:2)
What say ye?
The fork page... (Score:5, Informative)
The summary makes light of it, but the Funpidgin page explains that their intention is to respond more directly to the requests of the user community. In addition to the feature mentioned in the summary, Funpidgin has implemented some others [sourceforge.net], and will presumably continue adding user-requested features (while still integrating upgrades from the pidgin codebase, presumably).
Forks are both good and bad; this one is no exception. On the one hand it "wastes effort" and can duplicate work. On the other hand, it can give the user community (which isn't homogeneous) the product(s) they want. It can encourage useful competition. Often the end result will be better than if no fork had occurred. Another example is the Compiz/Beryl fork, which created some duplication for awhile, but ultimately turned out for the best since the merged Compiz Fusion includes the best features from both (a stable core and all the whiz-bang features users wanted, in the form of plugins).
If both the Pidgin and Funpidgin developers work to provide something that their respective users find worthwhile, then what's the problem?
Considering my general hatred of the Pidgin UI (Score:5, Informative)
Considering my general hatred of the Pidgin UI, no, I don't find this ridiculous.
Let's start with Pidgin's UI Sucks [xenoveritas.org], which details some of the weird UI decisions made back around version 2.1. Fortunately they've fixed almost all the issues listed in that post.
More Pidgin Bashing [xenoveritas.org] is just a bug, so let's skip ahead to Pidgin's Crappy Formatting Icons [xenoveritas.org] which they have not fixed.
If I ever had the time to, I'd like to write a new UI for libpurple, Pidgin's backend. I have some ideas - but not enough time to actually learn how to use libpurple.
Maybe I can help with this fork, called... uh. Hm. The summary doesn't appear to mention it.
Ah, here we go: funpidgin [sourceforge.net].
Where is the Fork? (Score:2)
can't blame them (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:can't blame them (Score:4, Insightful)
Clearly, this is a matter of personal preference, nothing more. Luckily for me, Psi has an option to choose either behavior...
Yes, its ridiculous (Score:2)
If there was money involved, it would never have happened. (Paying customers have a way of getting what they want, but people who develop for the karma occasionally take a "my way or no way" approach.) [/me, expecting flames].
But the beauty of Open Source is the self correcting nature of the development community. People can take it and do what they want with it. This would never happen in a closed source product.
Funny.... (Score:2)
Sticking with Pidgin (Score:2)
Good. Providing too many options, especially UI options, is a stupid mistake made by many open-source projects. You end up with software which is impossible to test and which often looks terrible.
fork
Crazy. But, hey, it's their time. Let the users decide; I'm sticking with Pidgin.
Ridiculous? (Score:4, Informative)
Pidgin guys are probably right. (Score:3, Interesting)
Options suck.
Every option means doubling the number of possible configurations - which makes proper testing of the application twice as hard. It also provides twice as many weird ways that the developers can have their apps configured that will prevent them from noticing issues as they personally develop.
There are some applications and configuration options where this isn't true - for example, a text editor for programmers would be less useful if you couldn't configure how many spaces are in a tab - but for simple end-user facing applications like Pidgin and the mechanism for resizing the text input box making a choice arbitrarily (or optimizing for UI simplicity) among the usable possibilities is probably the correct design decision.
There is always going to be a vocal minority who really wants to be able to configure every last little thing about their software. For free software, they can simply be pointed to the source code and told to have fun. As a usability compromise, features like Mozilla's "about:config" are good - as long as the user is told that weird configurations won't be supported. But in this particular case the best solution really seems to be for the Pidgin guys to just tell the forkers to "have fun" and then proceed to ignore them because the feature they're offering is silly and pointless.
Re:Pidgin guys are probably right. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If by "most people" you mean "a small handful of people" then yes.. "most people".
It is true that it is very difficult to accurately judge how many users like or dislike a new "feature".
However, given the number of people that commented on the pidgin buglist, the number of people who started threads in various linux forums complaining about the new behavior, and the number of people criticizing the move here on slashdot, I'd say it's disingenuous to say it is "a small handful of people" who don't approve of the auto-resizing input field.
Probably the best way to measure the size of
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Have you actually used it? Did you try the old version?
If not, why do you have an opinion on it at all? If so, what specifically is wrong with it.
Personally, I've been using it for a while now and it works fine - most messages are a single line and having the text box grow by a line when I exceed the length of a line is wonderfully convenient.
Stupid Users! (Score:5, Funny)
If it wasn't for them, programming would be much easier.
Now we just need to fork Gnome... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is the "ego bigger than brains" mentality that permeates the open-source community and it pisses me off. This is the same mentality that resulted in Firefox/Thunderbird with their paucity of configuration options c
Re:i for one... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:i for one... (Score:5, Informative)
The Safari text boxes are compound widgets (or metawidgets [wikipedia.org], if you like), which include a "resize handle" widget in their corner.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What, the concept that different people might actually have different preferences is "childish"? The Pidgin developers removed a feature that many people liked (myself included). When it was requested that they at least give an option for it, they outright refused. That is childish. The ability to fork a project if you think you can do better is one of the great strengths of Open Source software, because it means that the software can't get held back or bogged down by one person's vision of how things "must
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Its important to remember though that with many options you increase the amount of testing an application requires. That might not be the case for this text entry box, but having an option of MDI or not is pretty significant. It would be easy for a developer to put in a feature that breaks the option he doesnt use and it becomes necessary for QA to do a full regression in both modes.
People love options, but they arent always whats best for a product. If you can come up with one option that makes 90% of u
Re:Good God (Score:5, Funny)
I think we ought to formulate the Slashdot law, in a similar spirit to Godwin's law:
Slashdot Law: As a conversation on Slashdot grows longer, the probability of comparing someone to or bashing Microsoft approaches 1.
Re:Good God (Score:5, Informative)
No slashdot thread is complete without at least one (1) Microsoft bash.
Corollary: As it adds to the completeness of the thread, it will be modded informative.
Re:Good God (Score:5, Informative)
Alrighty then.
*ahem* Microsoft SUCK0RZ!!!1111ONE
There. Mission Accomplished!
Re: (Score:2)
Also, if you are a boss with an employee that is demanding and dogmatic you could (a) let him have his way, (b) fire him, or (c) give him money to shut up
Re:Good God (Score:5, Insightful)
But, yeah it's no joke... I gave up on being a test engineer for software after being let go (along with some others) at M.S. because I a would not pass a product with a clearly significant usability flaw. The development said it was by design and a feature. (Very similiar to the resizing functions mentioned above.)
I went and did the numbers and a full quality project, VOC data, etc. I presented my case at a later build. The developer, not having any actual evidence but his opinion, went into a flame war, trying to take me down. Effectively, I was insulting is 'intellegence' and want to 'undo months of work'. When that failed, he called me racist. He won, I got let go. I found out he was let go a couple months later over trying to defend the same 'feature' after a presentation with some higher ups, and insulted someone above him.
These flame wars happen all to much, I've found many programmers have 'control issues', perhaps that's what makes them good programmers; but lousy decision makers.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The thing with this sort of program is that it'd be trivial to put a "choose your own color" option in the configuration, so everyone could make the bikeshed whatever goddamn color they wanted.
Instead, the dev team has hashed this whole thing out amongst themselves in a "bikeshed" style debate, and they've come up with this fricking solution which they had to sweat blood to get everyone to agree to, and then it turns out that users don't like it?
I can see why they're stuck on their solution, but
Re:Good God (Score:4, Insightful)
On the other hand, if you fix the UI, lots of users will complain initially. A majority of those will quickly adjust and stop noticing the difference. Some will walk away or fork the project. However, for those that stick around are much more likely to find that the UI functions properly in the manner intended than if the attention of developers was spread among thousands of possible configurations.
It's a basic choice for a project developer to do one thing well or provide many options where some or all do not work quite as well.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
We are talking about an instant messaging program here right? Something that is used for communication with others? Just like cell phones, or email clients. I judge them on how well they work for communication and how many other features I want/need.
For some people, the more options the better. I really prefer to have one device to carry around, not 3-4. Phone, email, mp3 player, mild web surfing, all in one, but just hacking together something that does all of this "
Re:I welcome the fork!! (Score:5, Interesting)
in fact, why don't I post some of it: