Authorative drive is what makes software more inclusive. It can focus the resources and attention where its needed,

Where a particular groups think it’s needed.

Let’s take some examples. In the linux world, there are multiple DEs, with different GUIs and approaches on how to interact with a computer. People used to the windows look might feel better and be more productive in KDE, while people who are more used to phones might prefer GNOME. There are DEs that are very lightweight with resources, so that people with older machines aren’t left out, and there are people who don’t even like DEs at all, who might prefer something like i3. In the end, everyone can have something to run on their machines, and which they will feel more comfortable with, instead of a particular group of people deciding how someone should interact with a computer, and people having to use it the way they want, whether they like it or not.

Doesnt mean it has to be monolithic/monoculture. but a single product that serves 80% of everyones wants and desires is a better, superior product to one that tries to cater to and serve 100% to each, different individual.

I agree with that, and maybe we’re talking about different things? The kind of diversity I mention is multiple projects aiming at 80% of different people, but coexisting.

Just a reminder to take the data in that site with a grain of salt. I used to share them a lot, but then decided to read more about their methodology, and turns out it’s mostly a black box, so they may be subject to several kinds of biases, and we can’t even know. For example, we don’t know which sites use their analytics and if there’s a geographical bias. We also don’t know how their scripts work and how the data is collected from devices. It would be nice if we had more sources of marketshare data to compare

But how much is too much? Diversity is a great thing for people, makes technology less authoritative and more inclusive.

I use several, but the ones that I consider to be basic functions are caffeine, tray icons, places status indicator, removable drive menu and extended volume indicator. That last one is a nice example of my frustration, because it can’t be installed on the current gnome version anymore, and having to open settings to switch my audio output is terrible. Every distro upgrade have been the same experience, and I lose some functionality

Long time Gnome user here: I like the general Gnome simplicity of use and workflow and got used to it, but I’m really tired of having to install extensions for very basic things, and of it messing all my extensions on each version upgrade, so I have to reinstall everything. I started experimenting with KDE, and looking forward to cosmic.

I also prefer to get my software from the distro’s repos, but for software from third parties, flatpak adds a security layer, making it more secure when compared, for example, to aur.

I don’t have a full answer, so I won’t try to answer it right now, but I will surely think about it during the next days.

I don’t choose. To continue living is just the default, and time keeps passing, so I’m alive by inaction…

Could we uninstall almost all non system apps, make it autostart and prevent any other app from getting in the way?

You can replace in the sense of making new releases on the gpl license. The mit license only requires to keep the original copyright notice. I changed the original comment to avoid this confusion, thanks for pointing that out.

A long time ago I tried to run multiple distros in live mode on it and got only one (Puppy) to work. Display, sound, ethernet and pretty much everything worked fine. GPU seemed to be an issue though because NVidia and I couldn’t install the driver (it was skill issue and I think it’s possible to do). But now it doesn’t work for some reason.

Puppy linux has 3 versions, based on different distros. Maybe you tried one version back then, and now a different one?

deleted by creator

The original code never stops being free, but the code incorporated into a new project will be, so it’s a misleading term to people unfamiliar with open source licensing, that may think the license somehow expires. Even the fsf doesn’t use such terminology. They use reciprocal and nonreciprocal, because it translates the idea that gpl-like licenses create a relationship of reciprocity, and bsd-like ones create a relationship of non reciprocity.

In this world of enshittification and organizations becoming more and more aggressive, it’s so nice and refreshing to see proton doing the opposite and moving to a better model :)

Thats really interesting, I didn’t know that concept existed in foss licenses.

Temporarily free gives the idea that the code will stop being free at some point and may cause misunderstandings. It would be better to use nonreciprocal.

What are the advantages of apache over mit?

You can use the gpl license in newer versions of your software, but keep in mind, in order to avoid future misunderstandings, that you can only do that because the upstream project uses the mit license. If the project used a reciprocal license like the gpl, you’d need to stick to it or use a compatible one. You can’t, for example, take a upstream gpl project and use a mit license

It’s a common scenario in software. We think some things like ui designs and workflows are “natural”, but they’re quire arbitrary, and people just got used to them. Then people who are used to it will feel lost with any different workflow, and people who first learned the different ones may feel at home.

A nice example is the windows ui, that a lot of people who grew up with it feel like the most straightforward way to use a computer, but people who grew up with smartphones usually struggle with it and find something like the gnome ui more straightforward.

Most users? You can’t just make statistical claims without actual data. It’s fine to dislike something, but you don’t have to force your opinions on others. Gimp has its flaws and lack features a lot of professionals need, but a lot of people happily use it daily for their tasks. I agree that we need more open source software in this field, but that doesn’t mean gimp can’t coexist.