Re: 2.4 module list and rationale

> As you may have noticed, in both GEP 10 and GEP 11 I use 'applications'
> almost exclusively instead of 'modules'. I'd like to keep these focused
> on applications and sort of assume that if an application uses a
> library, we'll figure out how to deal with it. So, for example, since
> gedit is in the list, that would imply that any of your dependencies
> (assuming they were sane) would also automatically go in.
> This may be the wrong approach, I'm really not sure. But that is at
> least my current plan.

I think we may need to make exception for some accessibility services
(those judged suffiently mature, and of general interest, etc.), as was
discussed at yesterday's release team meeting.

The primary candidate at this time, in terms of API stability and
maturity, and because it does include a useful standalone binary, is

I would also consider at-poke for the 'developer' platform since it's a
very handy developer tool w.r.t accessibility.


Bill Haneman <bill haneman sun com>

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