GNOME and KDE Extension Philosophy

Lets Extensions manipulate Shell code willy-nilly Blames Extensions devs if user desktops explode Break extensions with every new version Won't change anything because "Developer Freedom" Will still advertise ability to use Extensions Rewrite half their codebase if something sucks. "However, some things will always have to contain QML code, like 3rd-party widgets and wallpaper plugins. For these, we devised a plan to sandbox them so they can't blow up the world if they misbehave." Redesigns whole theming engine instead of restrictions.

A comparison meme contrasts GNOME and KDE approaches to extensions and theming. GNOME is mocked for allowing extensions to manipulate shell code, blaming developers when desktops break, and continuing to advertise extensions, while KDE is praised for rewriting code and sandboxing risky QML-based widgets and wallpaper plugins. It is used as a humorous reaction to software design trade-offs and the debate over flexibility versus stability. A comparison meme contrasts GNOME and KDE approaches to extensions and theming. GNOME is mocked for allowing extensions to manipulate shell code, blaming developers when desktops break, and continuing to advertise extensions, while KDE is praised for rewriting code and sandboxing risky QML-based widgets and wallpaper plugins. It is used as a humorous reaction to software design trade-offs and the debate over flexibility versus stability.

• @gentoomemes / 17146 2025-05-05