Re: GNOME Development Series Snapshot 2.3.0: "Mighty Atom"

On Fri, 2003-04-11 at 11:44, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2003 at 06:08:12PM +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote: 
> > But in this case, with the browser, it's a harder problem. Now we have two
> > projects to choose from, both of which have their merits, some historical
> > baggage, and no one wants to offend the maintainers or get anyone
> > off-side.
> Well, everybody flames me all the time anyway, so I'll go ahead and
> advocate epiphany. I've been using epiphany for months; other than the
> occasional bug, which have been getting fixed, it's great.  The
> bookmarks stuff wasn't done last time I compiled, but Marco did a UI
> design for it in advance. Starting with user tasks, moving on to
> mockups, etc. The UI spec looked very reasonable and I'm confident
> we'll have good results there. Anyway, this is a model that all GNOME
> maintainers should follow.
> I have a lot of confidence in both Marco's ability to get a working
> browser written, and his UI instincts.
> Historically speaking, I *thought* Galeon was forked off specifically
> because Epiphany wanted to follow GNOME direction - if Galeon says
> they want to follow GNOME direction now, can someone explain to me why
> we have two browsers then?

I'll second Epiphany too.  It's simply easy to use, it just works.

Galeon releases and they are making an effort to comply more with HIG. 
Galeon is still emphasizing the power-user.  I am a power-user and I do
use it from time to time.  Is it possible to have one controler, two
views?  I note that the gconf setting for both are very similar (as they
were the same code a year ago), only the GUI is differentiates the
configurable behavior.

__C U R T I S  C.  H O V E Y____________________
sinzui cox net
Guilty of stealing everything I am.

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