I'm curious, has Galeon's direction and mission statement changed at all with the advent of Phoenix and Epiphany? Epiphany seems to want to stick rigidly to the HIG, which is a good thing because I think GNOME needs a HIG-compliant browser. Unless I'm mistaken, HIG-compliance is (or was) a key goal of Galeon. Now that Marco has gone off to create Epiphany, is there any need for Galeon to follow the HIG so rigidly? Galeon1 has become widely used and loved because of its flexibility and power. IMHO, there was a real need in the community for a 'power-user' browser, and Galeon has filled that slot well. So where is Galeon2 taking us? From what I can see (please correct me if I'm wrong), it is ignoring its main userbase and discarding its best features, the features that made Galeon unique and worth using in the first place. Without advanced features like session support (with sessions savable to files), I'd might as well be using Konqueror or Phoenix. And as I alluded to above, there is no longer any need for simplification (some would say 'dumbing-down') because Epiphany is already doing that job admirably. Is there any point in having two HIG-compliant browsers? Surely only one would be admitted to be the official GNOME browser, so why should Galeon waste its time? Leave that job to Epiphany and focus on building a functional browser, just as Galeon1 already is. You already have a strong and loyal userbase. Don't throw that away. On the contrary, you should try to leverage this userbase to build a great browser. -- Sridhar Dhanapalan [Yama | http://www.pclinuxonline.com/] "If you set a man by a fire, you keep him warm all day, but set a man on fire and you keep him warm the rest of his life." -- Terry Pratchett
Attachment:
pgpftoluwruxZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature