Re: Evolution 2.0 and GNOME 2.6

Andrew Sobala wrote:

>Anyway, GNOME doesn't add modules based on trying to tick off marketing

Maybe it should.

>So far, that's worked pretty well,..

Maybe with some marketing and strategy along the way could do EVEN better.
Why write off the strategic implications of an under-featured Gnome release
just because it was "good enough" in the past? Why not try to maximize the

After reading my own message earlier and thinking it through a bit more I
believe that the possible solutions can be summarized like this:

-- Discard Evolution's inclusion for 2.6

Good points: No buggy software ships with 2.6.0.
Bad points: Very few new user-visible features. No Email client with the
Gnome DE.

-- Find 1-2 replacements to fill up the hole

Good points: Might be able to pull it though, if we add 1-2 multimedia apps
or something else.
Bad points: If these replacements were good enough right now, they would
already be part of 2.6.

-- Slip Gnome's 2.6 release to match's Evolution's.

Good points: Evolution makes it to the default distro.
Bad points: Gnome loses the "battle" with KDE 3.2, because of the time it
took it to get released. Users might get frustrated.

Personally, I would go with solution #2 (I understand that #3 is out of the
question), but I would definately not leave the situation as is because as a
user who have tried 2.5.3, I find the 2.6 under-featured, comparatively to
2.4 and the upcoming KDE release (yes, it is a race in my opinion, user
market share has implications in the way the project functions and evolves).


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