Re: SVG format in metacity, gtk, desklets and build system for Gnome

On Thu, 2003-09-04 at 08:35, Marcin Antczak wrote:
> W liście z czw, 04-09-2003, godz. 13:40, Thomas Vander Stichele pisze: 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > > > A beginner will use its distro binary packages...
> > > 
> > > Which are awful.
> > 
> > crap.  (either the argument or the distro)
> >  
> > > > > I think that specialized installation and builing system for Desktop
> > > > > Environment is very important - and this is not a beginning of flame
> > > > > war.
> > then go for it.
> > 
> > 
> > Basically you're saying "every way out there of doing it is crap" and
> > "the idea I'm going to have is going to be better than all other ways". 
> > So the next logical step is to show us an implementation that works in
> > order to convince us.
> No, I wasn't saying - I was asking:
> "Don't you think that Gnome desktop could have it's own modern build
> system, which could be fast and effective?"
> And later i was asking (because I'm not C/C++ coder):
> "I rather think that I could create some service like Ximian does but
> really based on Java engine and I would like to use Ant, Jelly, and
> other XML based technologies to generate shell scripts user could
> downolad and build binaries preconfigured and optimized for his needs -
> just something like more andvanced and interactive rpm spec files.
> Maybe you could give me some opinions what do you think about this idea?
> Is it worth to spend some time and energy on this?"

So let me get this straight, first you derail Havoc for using a "non-standard" 
file format then you want to create your own build format.  I think you are 
begining to understand that one size does not fit all.  It is worth the time 
and effort if you wish to put that time and effort into it.

> And I still don't see any answer for my questions.
Or the answer you are looking for?

> I'm sure you all know what are advantages of GNU build system, rpm, apt
> and so on... and my question is still opened:
> Don't you think that Gnome should be _above_ this and have some _own_,
> dedicated, visual (this just should be Gnome application) tool for
> fetching, building, installing, upgradeing?
Above what? Those are the standards.  Don't compain that it is hard to 
build and install beta code. It is intentionaly like this to prevent 
non-technical users from shooting themselves in the foot with unfinnished code.
Dirstos then take the upsteam code and package and test them to make
sure users don't run into the problems that compiling from source can
sometimes bring.

> I just don't want to use on single machine tools like redcarpet (for
> system and xd2), apt (for other optional packages - for example
> rhythmbox from and build another gnome
> applications by hand (for example
Ok then use Debian unstable and you can get all those packages with just
apt.  If it is not in there (like ggadu) then help out by setting up
your own repository and packaging it.

> I know that maybe you think that it is "natural" but I don't like it.
> I would like to have one way to build and upgrade my environment.
> That's all.
Then do it and send in patches or a link to your program.  The way you
are going about getting these ideas done(and I'm not saying any of them
are all that bad) just isn't working.  If you don't know C/C++ then
learn it.  If you don't want to then pay somone to do it.  Your ideas
are noted and perhaps somone will come along and decide to implement
them but you can't expect it to happen (and you reduce your chances by
calling other's code crap, awful or propriatary).  I defer to my blog
entry from yesterday to expand on this and will say no more in this


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