BUT, in general, UX and interaction design simply is not a reductionist process the way implementing functional requirements is. It is an inherently holistic endeavor, an art more than a science, and that is why it helps tremendously to have a single competent person in charge who has a vision of how things should work.

I understand that to the typical programmer mindset it is frustrating when people come and complain that the UI is clunky and unintuitive without being able to express their frustration as a list of actionable "this does A but it should do B" tickets. But that's just how it works! Understanding and empathizing with the users simply requires a different skillset than programming.

That's how software goes, it's a conglomeration of all the features for all of it's myriad of uses. What would benefit one use case might be detrimental for another, and no one UI/UX developer is going to be able to fathom all of those different use cases or conceptualize a UI that's ideally suited for them all.

What you do often get with dedicated resources is a direction drive and clarity of vision that is not in line with what everyone wants and their UI/UX ends up driving people away.

I don't use half of what Inkscape has to offer and I use Inkscape for two very distinct and very different use cases. And for both of those use cases Inkscape is far and away the best piece of software.

For web development, Inkscape is my go to SVG editor. I don't use it as a vector drawing tool at all, if the drawing and filter capabilities went away it wouldn't matter much to me. But the ability to quickly manipulate canvas sizes, add and remove objects, and tweak paths is essential.

When I use Inkscape as part of a CAD/CAM solution engraving, the use case and what UI/UX elements are important is completely different than when I'm optimizing SVG Assets for the web. Certain UI/UX elements I require as a web developer could vanish and I wouldn't care as a CNC operator.

I'm reasonably certain that much of what I value in Inkscape isn't of much use to someone who is producing vector art.

Instead they grow organically over time and are a reflection not just how things are implemented but also of when they were implemented.

The blender 2.50 release was awful for me, since it broke so many of my workflows, but the UI absolutely needed a revamp, and I have incredible respect for the team throwing so much away to make something better.

I wish more open source software would delete more things in order to provide a better or more thought out user experience.

I’ll also note that telling users that their sub-par user experience doesn’t mean that the application has bad UX is foolish. That’s what user experience is. And it’s not a unique position; look at the comments here. The number one complaint is UX. These people ARE the users. I can’t imagine more direct feedback than that.