Re: who gets in and why, aka the GNOME Desktop inclusion criteria

[John Fleck <jfleck inkstain net>]

On Tue, Aug 27, 2002 at 10:48:54AM +0100, Glynn Foster wrote:
> Hey guys,
> 
> > > > While I feel you have a good set of standards for the GNOME desktop to
> > > > live up to I believe you have left out one of the most important
> > > > requirements.  I think all GNOME desktop applications need to have good
> > > > documentation.  
> 
> Absolutely, couldn't agree more....this definitely should have been in
> the list ;)
> 
> > > [Which, really, is sort of my biggest worry. For those of you who
> > > /don't/ develop apps that are part of GNOME, but who might want to be-
> > > what do you think of these? Are they too intimidating? Too binding? What
> > > do you think? Would you be willing to do these things in order to become
> > > part of the desktop?]
> 
> I would kiss the person who would come up with an online doc for all
> this stuff. I looked at gnome-docu/gdp/gdp-example2 a little and the doc
> stuff still has an element of 'voodoo' in it.
> 

We've got this already in the latest draft of the GDP Handbook (thanks to
Eric's work):
http://www.inkstain.net/fleck/handbook/buildingdocs.html
We've also got a version in Malcolm's porting guide, though I blush to realize
it's slightly out of date (/me adds a note to his own todo list :-)
http://developer.gnome.org/dotplan/porting/ar01s06.html
Cheers,
John