Re: Discussion: 2.2 Proposed Modules List

Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org> writes:

> So,
> My comments to get the discussion going - note that these are entirely my
> own opinion, and not necessarily representative of what the release team
> thinks. :-)
> >   - acme: Daemon and configuration utility for 'special' keys on modern
> >     multimedia keyboards and notebooks.
> acme rocks, I use it on my iBook and desktop machine. But, shouldn't these
> features be in metacity? Hard to say, given that acme includes weird
> hardware support, etc. Two keybindings configurators seems a bit redundant,
> and I'm not sure we should be adding modules that we intend to integrate
> later on.
> Bastien, what are your plans/wishes for acme?

I definitely want to add Acme's functionality to the control center for
2.4.  It's the only sane way to handle key conflicts.  I'll work with
Bastian on this after 2.2 is done.  Acme as a concept definitely
shouldn't exist on its own.  It's probably fine for this release,

> >   - galeon: Web browser. Depends on Mozilla.
> Marco has done an incredible job porting Galeon to the GNOME 2.x platform,
> but has unfortunately decided to give up maintainership. This puts Galeon in
> a precarious position for 2.2, but work continues, and the other developers
> appear to be interested in working on it further. Will probably require some
> input from them (philipl, ric, etc).

It'll mean we depend on Mozilla.  This is fine for me, but might be
painful for others.

> >   - gcalctool: Scientific calculator. Proposed to replace gnome-calculator.
> Do we need an advanced calculator in our desktop release? I'm not convinced
> that gcalctool is as cool as our current one, despite its preference for
> correct floating point answers. :-)

We should ship one and only one calculator.  If gcalctool is much
better, lets replace gnome-calculator in gnome-utils.  I would be sad to
see the easter-egg go, though.

> >   - ggv: PDF and PostScript viewer.
> Could do with some UI review love, but definitely worth getting back into
> the Desktop release.


> >   - gnome-icon-theme: Default GNOME icon theme.
> I reckon this should be in gnome-themes, or at worst libgnomeui. Ahem. ;-)
> We need this so our default icons don't look like arse.

This is actually something that's been bothering me while working on
metathemes.  We don't currently have any kind of policy on what themes
we ship, and what the 'default' GNOME look-and-feel should be.  I would
really like to ship GNOME w/ 5 or 6 high quality metathemes, with one as
the definite default.  Anyone have thoughts on this?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]