Re: Vino: proposal for inclusion in GNOME 2.8

On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 06:29 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-07-12 at 21:03, Luis Villa wrote:
> > On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 05:51 +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > > <quote who="Luis Villa">
> > > 
> > > > On Mon, 2004-07-12 at 20:40 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> > > > > perhaps its useful to get this in 2.8.
> > > > 
> > > > why?
> > > 
> > > It's bloody useful, even the way it is at the moment. Plus, wider testing,
> > > and ability to compete in the feature paralysis review stakes.
> > 
> > But given that (as far as I can see) there is basically no gnome
> > integration at the moment
> 	I must have a different definition of GNOME integration than you ...
> how does Vino have "basically no gnome integration"?

>From my reading of your own description, most of the cool, tie-in-with-
other-bits stuff (gdm, for example) would be in the 2.10 timeframe. I
mean, we don't even have a VNC viewer- how is this different from
proposing, say, a jabber server with a gtk configuration tool? Or hell,
X+redhat-config-xfree86? Both of those things are useful servers, sure,
but it's not clear why they would belong in gnome, other than 'useful,
and has a gtk interface at some point.'

[As a side note, 'getting wider testing' is not a reason to get into the
desktop release- you should get wide testing /before/ getting into the
desktop release, so that we make sure that the desktop remains at a high
level of quality.]


P.S. Please don't take this as crapping on vino; obviously what you're
doing, Mark, especially once we have a good viewer, is really awesome
stuff that I look forward to using at home. I'm just not clear why it
belongs in the desktop now.

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