[zxzax]

I don't think that actually is a problem though. For specific GNOME apps it's true, they tend to avoid having a lot of configuration settings. You can just avoid using those apps and use other ones.

The one part you can't replace is the shell, but you can pretty much configure every aspect of that using extensions. If you don't like the way the shell operates on a fundamental level, then you would probably be better served by using a different desktop.

[eqvinox]

You're making my point for me. You're suggesting I spend additional time cobbling together extensions (which presumably can end up unmaintained and/or break?) and swap out some applications.

This feels like ordering paella at a restaurant when I don't like seafood. Sure, I can eat around all the sea bits. But there's lots of other options at this restaurant, so why the f* would I order paella, knowing it has seafood I don't like?

I'm not gonna tell you not to order the paella, or that the paella is bad, or that the restaurant is bad, or whatever. But don't push the paella on me either please ;)

[zxzax]

I'm not sure I understand the point -- that's a different complaint entirely. The "cobbling together extensions and swapping out applications" is the customization, that's exactly what you asked for initially.

Edit: If the issue is that some extensions break and become unmaintained sometimes, that's unfortunate, but the only other solution there would actually be to put heavy limits on the extension API. Which would probably not be to your liking either because it would actually reduce customizability.

[Nursie]

The issue is that you have to install extensions, and that configurability has been deliberately removed, creating an inflexible and opinionated DE.

The problem is not that the extension API is too wide in scope, it's that you need to use an extension API at all to change even simple things.

[zxzax]

I'm afraid I don't understand -- the extensions are configurability. That hasn't been removed. If you didn't have an API to configure these things, there would be no way to do it at all, so it still sounds like you're asking for something contradictory. What would help here? What would be the benefit of removing the extension API, and what would you replace it with?

[Nursie]

It sounds more to me like you're twisting these things to make them seem contradictory.

> the extensions are configurability

And this is an inadequate mechanism.

(For me! If it works for you, that's great! Me, I like to be able to configure bars and widgets and menus and stuff wherever I want with a few clicks, which is why I run Xfce. Far be it from me to say there should only be one true desktop)

[zxzax]

I'm not sure what you mean twisting. If you're asking for the extension API to not be there, I think that would result in a strictly less configurable program. If that's not what you're asking for, then please clarify. Also, I'm not sure what you mean inadequate, the extension API is the internal API of the shell. You can use it to do anything that the shell can do. How could it be made adequate? You can install many extensions to configure the panels and menus in just a few clicks.

Edit: Somebody could probably make an extension to make the shell look and act like XFCE if that was really desired, for whatever reason. I don't think XFCE users would care much, but I just mean this as a way to illustrate what level the extension API sits at -- it's a level below the panels and menus and stuff.