Re: new modules consensus

[Ryan McDougall <NQG24419 nifty com>]

My 2 cents,

On Thu, 2004-12-08 at 14:06 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:

> 
> - Cantus
>    

The author himself withdrew the proposal, so this is a non-issue.

> 
> 
>  - libsoup
>    gal
>    gtkhtml
>    evolution-data-server
>    evolution
>    evolution-exchange
> 

YES, since IMO none of the issues are blockers. It would be nice if the
biggest opponents came up with a *list* of things that need to be done
by 2.10 so we can measure Evo's compliance by then.


>  - gnome-nettool
> 

I have no reason to *not* include it. What is the policy if the
consensus is ambivalence? 

> 
>  - gnome-system-tools

Same as above, however some have stated that g-s-t has been in this
limbo since 2.4. In that case, I change my vote to YES. Its not fair to
keep the maintainer guessing. If we decide later its not what we want,
we can always remove it.

> 
>  - gnome-volume-manager

YES.


>  - vino
> 

I would be happiest with a heavy-handed decision by you on all of these
modules except vino (for obvious reasons). Can you appoint someone
relatively unbiased to decide the fate of vino. Personally g-s-t,
nettool, and vino fall under the same category. If one gets in, then any
decent sys-admin-style tool should be able to.

> 
> Thanks,
> Mark.

Cheers,
Ryan