Re: Release Team's Almost-Final Modules List



On Wed, 2003-05-28 at 22:59, Luis Villa wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-05-28 at 18:47, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> > I fully support this.  Like I said, g-s-t looks cool, and I am willing
> > to do the work for FreeBSD.  I guess my point is about g-s-t's _current_
> > readiness for 2.4.
> 
> My[1] concern (and this is probably something that needs to go into GEP
> 10) is not so much for 'does it run on FreeBSD' as ''can it run on
> FreeBSD.' Joe, if it's your opinion that porting the current g-s-t
> infrastructure will be difficult/very hard (once you've been able to
> inspect it thoroughly), that's a huge strike against it. 

I looked at the Perl modules a few weeks ago, and thought, "man, that's
a lot of work."  However, after reading Carlos' mail, I think it's a
doable thing.  I still need some clarification on what to do in the case
of partitions.pl where the FreeBSD module would differ almost 100% from
the Linux module.  I would like to give it a try and report back if I
can.  I'll try to have a time estimate by Friday if that's acceptable.

Joe

> 
> OTOH, I don't think 'it's not yet ported to $FOO' should be a serious
> strike- we just want to make sure that when someone does want to port it
> somewhere it is reasonably possible to do so.
> 
> Luis
> 
> [1] I'm speaking only for myself, though I'd assume that most of release
> team would agree if polled.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
-- 
PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part



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