Re: 2.4 Module List and Rationale (aka GEP10 and 11)

[Malcolm Tredinnick <malcolm commsecure com au>]

On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 02:06:19PM +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> <quote who="Malcolm Tredinnick">
> 
> > > Committing to the desktop or platform release means committing to
> > > regular releases, project-specific requirements (i18n/a11y/etc), etc.
> > > It is a commitment to the long term use and viability of these modules
> > > that users and vendors can trust. It's not a small deal.
> > 
> > This is responding to something I did not write.  Commitments to all of
> > the features you mentioned can come whether or not a project is part of
> > the desktop release.
> 
> Long-term viability, inclusion in QA/release process, API/ABI guarantees and
> focus of the project etc., however, are really the big ones. They're not
> simple 'features', but they're incredibly important in terms of trust.

We are presumably talking at cross purposes here. None of this is
exclusive to being in the platform and can be fulfilled by items outside
it (after all you cannot get in without these commitments, so you must
have them before getting in by definition). I am not really sure what
this has to do with the discussion in this sub-thread, though, since
(hopefully) nobody is going to claim that only the apps in the desktop
release meet these criteria.

> > For Heaven's sake: my mail was _supporting_ the current process for
> > making up the desktop release! However, it was also pointing out -- in
> > deference to those for whom that release is not appropriate -- that it
> > is not the end of the world for them if the desktop release is not their
> > particular cup of tea.
> 
> Sure, I understand your support, but some of your points were not entirely
> accurate.

You have not enumerated those inaccuracies then. You have only pointed
out that you have a different outlook and choose to define and group
things differently. My whole mail was one of perceptions and, as such,
it's almost impossible for anybody to say that something is factually
inaccurate about them. I was providing a way of looking at the situation
that was not inconsistent with the situation at hand. I am not saying
your view is any more right or wrong than mine.

> The aim of the developer platform and desktop releases are to
> provide the 'greatest common factor' -> the basics of GNOME's commitment to
> developers and users.

Unless you are going to irrevocably tie the items in the "developer"
release to the "platform" release (which is silly, since the developer
release provides the means to make software that is both in the platform
release and other software that goes above and beyond), this is just a
marketing slogan. I cannot really go much further here if you are going
to keep libraries and applications together as a single unit, since
that's not the way a number of people are working.

I realise we (well, you (plural) -- stupid limited English pronouns) do
not have plans to make "developer" releases in the currently planned
future, but in essence they still exist: we have a bunch of libraries
that can be put togather to build applications. From thesei pieces and
others, various applications are put together of which some are selected
to go into the so-called "platform" release. That is the thing that
yesterday you were saying you wanted to be comparable with Winblows and
OS X. I am arguing that a lot of the complaints people make about the
direction of GNOME are ultimately targeted at the applications, not the
libraries. My current version of peace with the Universe is built on the
idea that I (and others) can just concentrate on the first of these two
bags of goodies and design and build applications that meet our needs.
But people who follow that path should not be denigrated for thinking or
acting in this way (which does happen, unfortunately).

> If either release (or module within) is inappropriate for a sizable chunk of
> our audience, then we're doing something wrong, and it ought to be fixed. If
> there are holes or problems, please let everyone know!

Given that it is impossible to judge the quantity or variation of the
various GNOME users, this can never be answered definitively. We witness
wild guesses about user bases and peoples' wishes on this list all the
time, but they are just that. In the end, people have settled for saying
that the audience the desktop release is targeted for are some kind of
hybrid Windows user moving across to GNOME and not wishing to relearn
much. Defining the audience like that is fine (it's one of the
contentions of the "Inmates..." book, after all), but it does not mean
the other groups do not exist. Only that we cannot measure them.

Malcolm

-- 
Atheism is a non-prophet organization.