Re: 2.3 Proposed Features
- From: Luis Villa <louie ximian com>
- To: Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>
- Cc: Ettore Perazzoli <ettore ximian com>, Christian Meyer <chrisime uni de>, Glynn Foster <glynn foster sun com>, aes gnome org, jdub perkypants org, desktop-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: 2.3 Proposed Features
- Date: 04 Feb 2003 02:07:59 -0500
On Tue, 2003-02-04 at 02:03, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 01:47:29AM -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
> > If something this damn important is still considered a prototype we
> > can't be shipping it in a stable release.
>
> You're missing an important distinction, which is that there are two
> separate things to stabilize, the user-visible experience and
> bug-freeness, and the API. libegg is not intended to be (inherently)
> unstable in terms of the first, it *is* intended to be inherently
> unstable in terms of the second.
As far as I can see, the GNOME experience with libegg so far is that
unstable API means unstable user-visible experience, because things get
imported unevenly and updated unevenly, and that is if/when they are
imported at all. So, I'm well aware of the distinction you're
describing, but so far the /practical/ distinction between the two
problems is small. Or so it seems to a naive but slightly technically
skilled user. :)
Luis
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]