Refuted what?
Pretending to refute something isn't a refutation, especially when you're being very emotional about it. There is also no need to be very upset either.
Try again.
I don't care about the shovels that you sell to developers, and you shouldn't care that some people want to have a little fun with their desktop. You don't do that. Fine, we get it. You made that extremely clear several times.
There is nothing to refute. We don't agree with you, we don't care about your opinion, and we're tired of hearing it.
Yes it is.
> I don't care about the shovels that you sell to developers, and you shouldn't care that some people want to have a little fun with their desktop. You don't do that, and don't think it's a "real" use-case. Fine, we get it. You made that extremely clear several times.
Clearly stating the reason why Desktop Linux support is eternally ill defined due to the moving parts of the desktop stack is the whole point of this, and no serious person would accept or cater support to a tiny minority of complaining Linux users to fix their highly tweaked non-standard desktop because they messed around with their dotfiles.
> There is nothing to refute. We don't agree with you, we don't care about your opinion, and we're tired of hearing it.
Who exactly is we? You don't speak for the one pretending to 'refute' my claims about the Linux Desktop ecosystem. They can explain why for themselves.
My claims about the Linux Desktop in my comments remain irrefutable, an evergreen fact and still no rebuttal to it exists because it is the truth.
At least I know not to buy your crappy "shovels". You clearly can't manufacture them to handle real world cases - let me guess they are the type of shovel that can only be used to shovel sand, and if some impurity, say a mote of dust, lands on your sand pile, it will destroy the shovel and you'll go rant about how the real problem is a lack of "standards" for sand instead of doing the reasonable thing and make a product that isn't just cleverly shaped trash.
There is no complicated contraption here. A couple tens of thousands of lines of code that makes arranging windows in any way you want completely effortless is a useful piece of software. Your window manager that just works probably uses more lines of code just for its animations.
Ignoring the combination matrix of Linux desktop distros combined with the multiple non-standard components in the desktop stack excluding the kernel (which is the only standard component) is an order of magnitude of complexity, qualifying the implementation, level of support, and testing and as a 'complicated contraption', including this project.
> Different people use their computer differently with different pieces of software and have different needs.
With the giant difference being how 'software support' is defined which for almost all Linux Desktop distros out there, is no standard distro meaning it being an ill defined, free for all.
It appears that some Linux Desktop fans here cannot handle it or even give a rebuttal other than cheap emotional swipes like this.
You can do better than that in your next reply.