RE: Galeon2 / Nautilus as a web browser [was: Re: KDE Interop [Wa s: D-BUS background]]

Actually we have a half-GEPed policy now for GNOME version numbers. I think
_almost_ everything in GNOME 2.2 is meant to have a 2.2.x version number.

But stuff that isn't part of GNOME platform or desktop, such as Galeon,
probably shouldn't bother with it. We don't need stuff calling itself
version 2.2.0 just because it uses GNOME 2.2 libraries.

Murray Cumming
murrayc usa net 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rodney Dawes [mailto:dobey free fr] 
> Sent: Montag, 10. März 2003 15:16
> To: Vadim Plessky
> Cc: desktop-devel-list gnome org
> Subject: Re: Galeon2 / Nautilus as a web browser [was: Re: 
> KDE Interop [Was: D-BUS background]]
> Applications that use a toolkit's libraries should not be 
> bound by the version in that toolkit. Yes, sometimes they are 
> confusing. In an ideal world though, they don't matter as 
> much as N > N-1, which is what the version number is all 
> about anyway.  Yes, Nautilus jumped from version 1.0 straight 
> up to 2.0 for the stable series. Lots of other applications 
> and/or libraries did similar. This doesn't mean everything 
> should, especially if it's not a core component of GNOME. 
> Metacity isn't even considered stable yet, and it's version 
> is 2.4.34. Should we require metacity themes to also be 
> versioned in the Fibonaci sequence? That makes no sense.
> -- dobey
> On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 08:58, Vadim Plessky wrote:
> > [vad VPlessky vad]$ rpm -q nautilus
> > nautilus-2.1.3-1mdk
> > 
> > So, it's different from, say, nautilus-1.4.2
> > 
> > If Galeon-1.3.2 designed for GNOME 2.2 - it should be (re)named 
> > galeon-2.2 This would also highlight the fact that GNOME 2.2 UI 
> > guidelines are implemented (if it's the case).
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org 
>> top-devel-list

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