Look at Debian. Red Hat and Fedora. Ubuntu. Mint. Arch. The other thousands of distros, as partially listed by distrowatch.com. What does this tell you about the Linux community? All of us believe that one size doesn't fit all. You have the people who prefer a slightly lower maintenance desktop. They install GNOME or KDE. You have people who have specific needs due to hardware. They might install LXDE. Some people use Linux as a server. They don't even have X. Blah blah blah, you get the idea. Now, LightDM is fundamentally flawed because it doesn't give you full integration, bells and all, with GNOME. Of course. No one uses KDE. No one uses XFCE, Enlightenment or LXDE. No one takes Openbox, tint2, their own handwritten daemons and what-not and builds essentially their own desktop and try to find a desktop-agnostic DM and write their own integration. No one. The GDM devs are competent? Of course. Everyone has some sort of competency. But some people are more competent than others. BitKeeper, the revision control system Linus Torvalds used before writing Git is good software, no? I'm quite sure it is, since Torvalds used it. But then he wrote Git. It is better, at least in my opinion. By what black magic is it that it beats a competently written piece of software? It is MORE competently written. Besides, LightDM doesn't do less, it assumes less. Its devs see that not everyone uses GNOME. But the capability is there. Or will be. Its developing. Rule of Modularity: Write simple parts connected by clean interfaces. Rule of Simplicity: Design for simplicity; add complexity only where you must. Rule of Diversity: Distrust all claims for "one true way". "Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." – Henry Spencer You think lightweight software is flawed? Go use Windows. Install 4GB applications that can only do one thing while looking ugly at it. Linux is for people who know how to customize or at least be open about others' customization.
And now, for an examination of YOUR misunderstanding.
Now, LightDM is fundamentally flawed because it doesn't give you full integration, bells and all, with GNOME. Of course. No one uses KDE. No one uses XFCE, Enlightenment or LXDE. No one takes Openbox, tint2, their own handwritten daemons and what-not and builds essentially their own desktop and try to find a desktop-agnostic DM and write their own integration. No one.
The GDM devs are competent? Of course. Everyone has some sort of competency. But some people are more competent than others. BitKeeper, the revision control system Linus Torvalds used before writing Git is good software, no? I'm quite sure it is, since Torvalds used it. But then he wrote Git. It is better, at least in my opinion. By what black magic is it that it beats a competently written piece of software? It is MORE competently written.
Besides, LightDM doesn't do less, it assumes less. Its devs see that not everyone uses GNOME. But the capability is there. Or will be. Its developing. Rule of Modularity: Write simple parts connected by clean interfaces. Rule of Simplicity: Design for simplicity; add complexity only where you must. Rule of Diversity: Distrust all claims for "one true way".
"Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." – Henry Spencer
You think lightweight software is flawed? Go use Windows. Install 4GB applications that can only do one thing while looking ugly at it. Linux is for people who know how to customize or at least be open about others' customization.