Re: Proposal for inclusion in Desktop: pessulus

[Elijah Newren <newren gmail com>]

On 10/28/05, Pat Suwalski <pat suwalski net> wrote:
> Jeff Waugh wrote:
> >>Could we have a separate 'Administrator Tools' release set?  I suppose we
> >>could, but what would be the point?  We aren't categorizing any of our
> >>other modules.
> >
> > Which is a problem. I fully support the creation of an admin release suite.
>
> How would this look in terms of the release? The release would obviously
> coincide with the gnome-desktop release.

We already have 3 release sets (desktop, platform, and bindings), and
have discussed a fourth (productivity--gnumeric, abiword, etc.). 
Having an admin suite would just mean defining rules for it (probably
would be very similar to the desktop rules) and having modules
proposed for it

> The source tarballs would be in the same place.

Not quite; It'd be
http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/<new-set-name>/$MAJMIN/$VERSION  
http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/desktop/$MAJMIN/$VERSION

> So the only difference would be suggested grouping to indicate to
> distros how to categorize their packages and/or create a gnome-admin
> metapackage?

There may be different rules associated with the different sets, but
it is possible that it merely serves as a grouping.  Also worth note
is that there has been talk about trying to "franchise the release
process" (on r-t? d-d-l?  I don't remember anymore...) in order to try
to make our releases feel more inclusive.  (As people have pointed out
before, "Why aren't Inkspace, GIMP, AbiWord, etc. part of the
"official" "Gnome releases"?!?)

Cheers,
Elijah