Just passin’ through
Snaps are a closed-source proprietary packaging format that Canonical controls. And they have also altered apt on Ubuntu to download snaps first before native packages. You may be using snaps right now without realizing it, which is also part of the issue.
it’s not a setup issue, it’s a hard limit of xorg. maybe having two xservers may help, but then you wouldn’t be able to move windows between them. the way multiple monitors are done using x is that they’re treated as one continuous screen, but that means it can get a bit wacky because they’re not the same.
Multimonitor is just a better experience on Wayland. For instance, you can have different refresh rates for your monitors and the way it’s handled isn’t janky and hacky.
The only things id be concerned about is that multi monitor will work better under Wayland but nvidia may not. Nvidia and wayland is getting better while multimonitor on X isn’t, but I don’t know exactly how things are rn enough to say
resolved sucks imo. i usually disable it and manually set the resolv.conf, or use something else. it has no way to force it to check name servers in a specific order and it has a memory so it’ll use the same name server for multiple checks even if it’s not the right name server. if these things were configurable, I’d agree that it’s good. but they’re not and it makes it very difficult to use in a lot situations.
we just need IRCv2 which should add chat history
I can understand Linus getting frustrated at people who consistently push him (i e. Lennart) and I agree that there’s a reason he’s stayed at the helm of kernel maintenance and development all this time; however, that doesn’t denigrate that this is an unacceptable way to treat someone which Linus himself acknowledges! If this were about ReiserFS going into the kernel, I would understand that. But a poorly made commit should not be met with this vitriol. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be consequences for poor work, but this is not it.
You’re making a false equivalency where stern is the same as toxic. There are more professional and clear ways to communicate the issues with code quality. No one is disagreeing that those need to be communicated. The Issue is how.
And because you seem to take stock in what Torvalds says, then consider that if he himself admitted these were harmful and inefficient methods of communication then they probably were. If it was leading to fantastic results in the kernel i don’t see why he would’ve stopped. My guess is that he learned something that it seems you may still have yet to: empathy.
You’re making judgements on people’s utility and ability based on the volatile reactions of man who admits to having issues. That creates toxic environments where people are not encouraged to do better, but any amount of change is due to fear of repercussions. This does not promote growth or new ideas that would genuinely improve something, but rather a fear of failure if they attempt something new. This also isn’t useful programming criticism because the actual useful criticism is buried in an emotional slurry that’s going to make something less receptive to the useful information.
He did hurt the mission. Plenty of kernel maintainers have left, and those were people who had been with the project for years. Losing experienced people to toxicity 1000% harms both the project and the product.
that’s fine, give me the hammer. I despise this increasingly pervasive online first mentality. I like native applications using native toolkits. They’re installed on my machine for a reason. I don’t want the clusterfuck of HTML, CAS, and JavaScript managing my interfaces; they’re horrible. Just because a monkey eating pop rocks can piss out a Pollock doesn’t mean i wanna buy it. I am absolutely willing to trade some UI/UX niceties for actual fucking applications.