On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 20:24, Havoc Pennington wrote: > On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 18:57, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > > I have to agree. Everyone here is talking about "distros." Well, GNOME > > is not just a DE for "distros." It runs on Solaris (not a "distro"), > > *BSD (not "distros"), and other UNIX-like OSes (some of which are not > > Linux "distros"). If GNOME wants to be a DE that "Just Works," it needs > > to be a solid bundle, offering all the applications a user expects in > > their desktop, and not rely on the underlying OS to always provide the > > missing bits. > > Let's keep the GNOME desktop/developer platform release in perspective. > Including or not including something in that doesn't change the number > of tarballs you have to download to get said something on Solaris, or > ease of compilation. Why is gnomemeeting part of the core desktop then? It is quite difficult to compile, and adds bulk that I think many users at this stage could do without. > > All including something in the core means is that we can have a > dependency of a core module on that something, and the something is > necessarily (rather than optionally) synced with the core release cycle. > > > Like Eugenia has said, if you look at other desktops, they do provide > > music and multimedia applications out of the box (e.g. WMP, iTunes, > > QuickTime). Why should GNOME be any different? > > GNOME desktop release isn't intended to be an entire desktop OS and > application suite, or it would be indistinguishable from FreeBSD or > Gentoo. Certainly we could have Office and Productivity suites to compliment the desktop, but I would argue that a media/music player is more essential to the desktop than, say, a video conferencing application. > > Note, I do kind of like the idea of including rhythmbox in the core, but > saying that GNOME has to have _everything_ in it just isn't right and > probably including everything is counterproductive to progress. Agreed. Segmenting applications such as AbiWord, Gnumeric, Evolution, etc. into other suites makes sense. Most other OSes/desktops do similar things. A media player should come standard, though. > Modularity is good, both code-wise and organization-wise. Coordination > between maintainers should only be introduced where useful, otherwise it > becomes pointless bureaucracy. > > The line I feel we should clearly have is between the core desktop and > "most applications" - some applications may need such tight desktop > integration we have to include them, or just be basic utilities. But > generally speaking the line around GNOME desktop release should exclude > apps. > > Note carefully: the GNOME Project still includes apps, as we have other > release sets such as GNOME Office, GNOME bindings, etc. The point here > is about the core desktop release set, not GNOME the entire project. > > The argument for Rhythmbox IMO is that it has an important user > datastore - music files - and I think we should be pushing for a vision > of one UI for accessing and searching all your data, including music, > movies, photos, documents, etc. Similar to the advantages of WinFS. That's fine, but couldn't we also provide users something in the meantime? Joe -- Joe Marcus Clarke FreeBSD GNOME Team :: gnome FreeBSD org FreeNode / #freebsd-gnome http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part