As far as I am aware of, Gnome went “this is it by default, want more customisability - here is API, install or write your own extensions”
Not even that is true. They do not provide an API (specifically decided not to due to “extension developer freedom”), but allow Extensions to monkey-patch code in. That’s why it becomes unstable due to Extensions instead of just the Extension (or at least the Extension process) crashing. Imagine every change in KDE being a KWin script, or Firefox still relying on monkey-patching instead of the extension API. It’s wild.
Meeting criticism of this absurd way of doing things in something as important as the graphical shell with “it’s FOSS so either contribute or shut up” mentality some people show here is just dumb.
Not even that is true. They do not provide an API (specifically decided not to due to “extension developer freedom”), but allow Extensions to monkey-patch code in. That’s why it becomes unstable due to Extensions instead of just the Extension (or at least the Extension process) crashing. Imagine every change in KDE being a KWin script, or Firefox still relying on monkey-patching instead of the extension API. It’s wild.
Meeting criticism of this absurd way of doing things in something as important as the graphical shell with “it’s FOSS so either contribute or shut up” mentality some people show here is just dumb.
Ouch. That’s some very unprofessional way of providing software, especially as important and widely used. Thank you for clarification