• JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    You can’t count it as good when it is unconfigurable when it happens to use your preference when the whole selling point of tabs is that they’re configurable.

    • kevincox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t understand what you are trying to say. I agree that SourceHut forcing their preference isn’t good. The other two are configurable and I have configured them to my preference on my machines.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You made it sound like Firefox wasn’t configurable, my bad. I thought you were saying you didn’t care that it wasn’t configurable because you liked the width they chose.

        • kevincox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh no. It is configurable, although it requires editing userContent.css. So barely configurable. I think it defaults to 8 but I reduce it to 4.

      • ck_@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I agree that SourceHut forcing their preference isn’t good.

        I don’t think this is a fair point. Every developer makes “opinionated” decisions on default settings on a daily basis. SourceHut is open source and anyone can propose a patch that makes the tab width configurable, which to my knowledge has not happened. “Forcing their preferences” would imo imply that this discussion happened and the patch was rejected without good reason.

        To me, this sounds a lot like the usual “I don’t like the how this thing that you provide for me for free is doing this one thing so I demand you change it for me free of charge” argument.