RE: 2.4 Proposed Modules - 2 weeks left

[Bill Haneman <bill haneman sun com>]

On Thu, 2003-05-08 at 11:52, mpeseng tin it wrote:

> The options are:
> 1 Start to ship gtk2 mozilla (or phoenix) with major, _not solvable_ usability
> problems (not HIG compliant, not native, ui mess in the mozilla case), but
> accessible.
> 2 Start to ship a mozilla embedder with the usability problems solved and
> with a clear path to add accessibility features (it's not like writing them
> from scratch, we can inherit most of mozilla work).

You omitted option 3, "defer until 2.6".

> No one of these is a regression. 

Neither is option 3.  I think it's fine to commit to a plan of action, I
think there is something like consensus that Epiphany or a similar
based-on-gecko-but-GNOME-ui solution is the way forward.

But I do not agree that moving forward on that plan requires doing it in
GNOME 2.4 Desktop.  Why not target 2.6? 

My point is that this discussion isn't solely about whether GNOME needs
a (official GNOME) browser; it's about whether Epiphany and GNOME-2.4
are the right browser at the right time.

- Bill

But the first one is short sighted (to
> have a feature faster, we ship something that will never reach our targets).
> 
> We all want an accessible and usable browser for GNOME:
> 
> - A gtkmozembed based browser is the only way to reach such target for the
> forseable future
> - We have a mantainer and a community very interested in putting work on
> such a solution
> - There is a clear way to solve the current accessibility issues. And the
> mantainer is interested in working on them when it will be possible (Sun
> guys complete their works on mozilla widget)
> - There still an alternative for disabled people until this work is completed.
> Adding a native browser to GNOME is not going to damage mozilla in any way.
> - The work on the native browser can help to solve another major issue in
> our development platform (the gtkhtml mess).
> - At some point we will be forced to choose an alternative to the mozilla
> interface. While we change it would be better to choose the best possible
> solution. Distributions are not forced to ship a GNOME component until it's
> ready for them.
> - There is a conflict in the GNOME community between two projects. It would
> important to make a call about it, so that one of the two will retarget
> or die. Mantaining two very similar projects is a waste of resources and
> a Galeon vs Epiphany war in the community is insane.
> 
> In such situation I think GNOME should adopt the project and work together
> to solve the remaining issues. I'm convinced this will speed up a lot the
> accessibility work too.
> 
> Havoc said that software has historically been improved by virtue of its
> inclusion.
> I'll just say that this "do the accessibility work or you will not be included"
> is certainly not working very well with me, it's making me lose motivation
> rather then gain it.
> 
> Marco
> 
>