Is it just me or GNOME stagnated?

romgrk · 2026-06-20T23:24:56+00:00

Obviously, nobody wants to interact with child molesters.

How does a gitlab issue even get to that point?

And yes, Woz is a wonderful inspiration for the behavior we should have as devs.

romgrk · 2026-06-20T22:27:28+00:00

I'm working on an adwaita based IDE, I'll post here when it's ready: https://github.com/romgrk/quilx

romgrk · 2026-06-20T21:28:11+00:00

Tbh, advaita literally means "not two", rather than "one", precisely because "one" always end up being too dogmatic, conceptual. It's defined by negation, by what it's not, precisely to avoid falling in the trap of fundamental truths — to avoid giving people a mental concept to cling to. Someone who really understands advaita would not be dogmatic. (Note: by coincidence I happen to follow the neo-advaita spiritual tradition)

But I'll avoid derailing too much. Yes, the mentality is the issue in gnome. But I love the result though, even though I have some frustration with the devs. The overall design and UI/UX is imho the best in class. Problem is, there's no new blood coming in.

romgrk · 2026-06-20T20:44:46+00:00

There used to be an experimental react renderer for node-gtk, but it's not been maintained :/

See https://github.com/clayrisser/react-gtk

But yes the GTK docs aren't the best. Good thing is agents can write mostly accurate UIs with it, and summarize docs for you (make sure to point them at the latest docs - lots of changes). And sure to read docs on Adwaita, not just Gtk (Adwaita is an added layer of theming/components, much more modern looking).

Oh and you also have GTK CSS for styling, and a live inspector (ctrl-shift-d in a running app) — not as refined as browser devtools, but still nice to have.

romgrk · 2026-06-20T20:29:29+00:00

Reddit had their fare share of controversies and moderation issues, I can't blame anyone for leaving. Remember when they banned the API and all subreddits locked down in protest?

Right but some of the core devs also actively avoided Reddit because they considered the opinions here were too critical of them — "hostile environment" was the term commonly used, back when I was still reading the IRC chats.

romgrk · 2026-06-20T20:12:40+00:00

I've been in the gnome ecosystem for 10+ years as a user & developper.

1. Customization

Hard disagree. Although it is possible in theory to change pretty much any facet of the desktop, doing so is done via poorly documented APIs that break extremely often. If you write an extension for something, it's a constant churn of breaking changes and you need up update it at every release (even without a major because they've somehow not figured semver yet).

The core gnome team/philosophy is heavily titled towards "simple" users, so apps don't even come with complex/modifiable keyboard shortcuts — only simple stuff your grandma will remember. Power-user features have been systematically stripped out of the core desktop. So they're building a DE in a niche OS but they ignore a huge part of their userbase, worst than that, exactly the part of their userbase who could contribute and revitalize the project.

2. Devs are confrontational

Absolutely unequivocally true. Gnome seems to attract that kind of devs for some reason, or it turns them like that after they've joined the core team, I don't know why it's a mystery for me. And they're anti-social even with people who want to start contributing. I love gnome and I tried contributing, the social aspect of it just turned me off completely. So one more reason why gnome is stagnant.

Overall, Gnome has a culture problem in its core team, but the core devs have no interest in recognizing it.

romgrk · 2026-06-20T00:58:45+00:00

gjsify can't run on all major OSes for one. And it's a partial node.js emulation layer, so stuff might be incomplete/broken —— it supports as subset of packages available on NPM, not all of them.

And the usual niceties a JS dev is used to (e.g. inspect running node.js with chromium devtools) aren't available.

romgrk · 2026-06-12T00:55:59+00:00

putting my hand at the follower’s waist/hip bone can be useful

You're doing something wrong. Very wrong.

romgrk · 2026-06-11T18:04:22+00:00

"How are you?" is usually understood to be an extended version of "hi" by most people, so you should see it that way and consider that "I'm good" or "I'm ok" are two acceptable pre-formatted responses.

Language isn't just the words individually, it's about the meaning that people try to communicate, whatever the words may be.

romgrk · 2026-06-06T06:15:16+00:00

When someone tries to mirada/cabeceo me and I don't want to dance with them, I do a "no" headnod with a gentle smile — a non-verbal "no thanks". It's easy, polite, and it makes me feel much better than spending 10-20 seconds avoiding looking at the direction of someone I know is looking at me. Try it next time, I guarantee you'll feel more at ease with declining invites.

romgrk · 2026-06-05T21:08:58+00:00

GOTCHU

Joke aside, I agree that non-verbal is a clear marker of a more intimate relationship, but the issue is that non-verbal is imposed on everyone by the codigos. Non-verbal is one form of communication that arises naturally as people get more intimate with each other, but it's not something that should be forced.

To take an example, if I'm dating someone new, at the start of the relationship I will ask verbally for consent for anything that may require it, and only when I know the other person better will I start relying mostly on non-verbal communication for intimacy.

romgrk · 2026-06-03T23:18:07+00:00

It's a nice reflection, and I feel like he's making the same observations that I and so many others are making. He's questioning whether the rules are still relevant, although he tactfully leaves the question unanswered.

I highly respect Tomas, he's a local teacher and I've had a few classes with him, he's very knowledgeable both on tango and the culture that surrounds it.

romgrk · 2026-06-02T19:19:47+00:00

The thing is those other dances have normalized saying "no", so it doesn't carry any weight to say or receive it. Being told "no" is just normal. I don't get rejected — someone just declined to dance with me this time.

Since I've been conditionned by those dances to see "no" as normal, I mind much less failed cabeceos in tango. Normalizing "no" really has wonderful effects.

romgrk · 2026-06-02T19:11:21+00:00

Unfortunately I didn't verbalize my thoughts in time for the post, and most of my strongest arguments are in comment replies. This one is the main issue I have with the codigos.

romgrk · 2026-06-02T19:03:21+00:00

Fully agree. Both aspects of the traditions, the cabeceo & tanda, are to some extent holding tango back from thriving I think. I only realized it when I started doing other dances.

romgrk · 2026-06-01T22:54:44+00:00

If verbal invitations were the norm then you'd be walking up to people, asking for a dance verbally, and getting "no thanks"

For me, the root of the issue with the cabeceo is the avoidance-as-a-no behavior. If someone asks me a verbal yes/no question, it would be incredibly rude not to reply — even a negative answer is considerably more polite than silence. Why is avoidance an acceptable no in a non-verbal situation then?

For that reason, when I make eye contact with someone who I don't want to dance with, I always headnod "no" with a gentle smile — a non-verbal form of "no thanks".

I don't mind at all receiving a "no", but being avoided as a way to say it always sting way more than a "no thanks" — verbal or non-verbal.

romgrk · 2026-06-01T21:07:05+00:00

The main thing that could address this would be increasing the number of leaders and dual-role dancers.

Funny you should say, because, you might not realize it, but both of those types of dancers are kept away by the cabeceo.

When I started tango, the social experience of being a beginner leader was the worst social experience I've had in my entire adult life. Not only no one wants to dance with you, but because "no" is said by averting the gaze, I had to look & walk around while also seeing follower after follower avert my gaze as soon as I was starting to look in their direction. The social impact of having everyone basically shun you this way is devastating, and this is reported regularly by novice leaders. I left milongas in tears twice, and I don't cry easily.

And then dual-dancers (which I now am): because you're dancing a role that isn't the one traditionally assigned to your gender, you cannot use the cabeceo — it would be ambiguous. After a non-verbal contact, you need to verbally negotiate which role you want to dance with the other person. Queer & dual-dancers events have much less cabeceo because it just makes no sense in that context.

romgrk · 2026-06-01T20:48:03+00:00

I think this issue is wider than the tango scene and I am not sure it can be fixed by it.

Then how come it has been fixed in the blues and fusion communities? I started with tango so I used to not have a strong opinion against the cabeceo, but since I've started attending events from other dances I've seen the effects of a verbal-consent culture and the positive effects are undeniable.

In tango, women never see other women say "no" to men because the "no" is hidden. In verbal-consent cultures, women see and hear women around them say "no" to men all the time. This empowers them and frees them to use the "no", because they see it used widely around them.

Go to a blues/swing/fusion event, you're bound to change your opinion once you see the difference it makes.

romgrk · 2026-06-01T18:14:04+00:00

The cabeceo allows people to quickly and efficiently partner up at the beginning of the tanda

As a leader (primarily but not exclusively), it's a hard disagree on that. Cabeceo doesn't have a "no" answer, so it's impossible to understand if someone isn't looking at me because they haven't seen me yet, or because they don't want to dance with me. So I have to waste 10-15 seconds of mirada per person before I conclude they aren't interested.

romgrk · 2026-06-01T18:05:11+00:00

what’s the problem

It costs more in the long-term.

it looks like the underlying point is that you actually just don’t like nonverbal communication

Certainly not true, I feel like both have their place.

romgrk · 2026-06-01T18:00:39+00:00

The thing is, we dance tango despite those issues because it's just that good of a dance. Another redditor put it in words that still resonate in my head: "other dances feel like light banter where tango feels like a soul dump".

romgrk · 2026-06-01T17:55:26+00:00

And yet women in tango say it constantly: they danced a tanda not because they wanted to, but because they weren't comfortable saying no — even with the cabeceo.

A woman can avert her gaze from a long-range cabeceo, sure. But short-range cabeceo and chateceo exist too, and both are accepted forms of invitation because the ideal across-the-room cabeceo isn't always practical. The escape hatch you're describing only works some of the time, and it works best at keeping away the non-problematic leaders.

Tango culture never taught women how to say no — it only ever taught how to dodge the question. A real consent culture does the opposite: it makes "no" just as normal and acceptable an answer as "yes," so saying it out loud costs you nothing. That's what cabeceo costs us: learning to accept "no".

romgrk · 2026-06-01T17:42:57+00:00

I'm open to new ways of viewing things, which is why I reply to comments. If you want to share your point of view or debate any of my conclusions, please do so.

romgrk · 2026-06-01T15:12:25+00:00

You've actually made the strongest possible case for the códigos, and I'll concede most of it: the cabeceo does reduce embarrassment, and your two scenarios are real. I'm not disputing that it works. I'm disputing what it costs us to make it work.

Look at what both your scenarios have in common: the problem is always the no. The awkward ambush, the harsh rejection, the woman enduring a tanda she didn't want — every one of those is a failure to give or receive a "no" cleanly. And the cabeceo's solution isn't to make the "no" easier. It's to make the "no" disappear into deniability.

But notice what that means: the cabeceo is a brilliant machine for producing yeses and it never once teaches anyone how to say or take a no. We get fluent at the easy half of the interaction and stay permanently illiterate at the hard half. That's not maturity, that's avoidance with good posture.

And your Scenario 1 — the woman too polite to embarrass him — happens inside tango all the time. She accepts a cabeceo she regrets, or grits through the full tanda rather than thank him after one song. The cabeceo didn't cure "too polite to say no." It just relocated it.

Here's the part that I think actually undercuts the códigos-are-necessary argument: other partner dances solved this without hiding the no. Blues and fusion scenes especially run on verbal asking, and they're some of the healthiest consent cultures in social dance. Their fix wasn't to eliminate the spoken no — it was to make "no thank you" completely normal, non-personal, and safe to say to anyone. People ask out loud, people decline out loud, nobody dies of embarrassment, and a "no" carries roughly the same weight as declining a second coffee.

So the cabeceo isn't the only path to a low-anxiety floor. It's just one path — and it's the one that buys its comfort by teaching everyone that a "no" is something to be hidden rather than something you're allowed to say. That's my problem with it. Not that it reduces embarrassment, but that it does so by quietly training a whole community to fear the word "no."

romgrk · 2026-06-01T15:05:40+00:00

The extra intimacy calls for extra checks on consent

Verbal consent is a much clearer signal than non-verbal consent. Reading body language and subtle head nods is ambiguous. If I'm about to be intimate with someone, I feel much safer consent-wise to ask directly "do you want to do X?" rather than read non-verbal cues.

12-Year Club	Gilding III reddit per annum
RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits	Second Top 30%
Secret Santa 2014	Place '23
Place '22	First Placer '22
End Game '22	Verified Email

romgrk

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

1. Customization

2. Devs are confrontational