Re: new module decisions [was Re: gnome-screensaver]

I think our thinking historically has been that distro's who really care
about GNOME don't really 'care' that much about our list of stuff in the
desktop release as they have a pretty good idea themselves what they
want/don't want. Distro's which don't care much about GNOME on the other
hand might look at our desktop release list, as a guide at least, for
what to package. So for instance KDE focused distro's who wants to be
able to checklist GNOME might look at it to see what should be packaged.


On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 09:11 -0500, Dan Winship wrote:
> Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 13:33 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
> >>   - David's recent point in this thread about the desktop release set
> >> not being so important also rings true to me.  It's a binary in-or-out
> >> yet there are lots of really rocking "Gnome" programs that are well
> >> integrated but aren't in the set.
> > 
> > It's foolish to imagine that being in the desktop release set is
> > essential. But it's also foolish to ignore the big benefits to focusing
> > our efforts (in a synchronized way) on particular implementations of the
> > features that we want. It allows us to release software for distros to
> > use.
> Do we have any evidence that any distro actually cares what we consider
> to be in and out of the desktop release? Is there some distro out there
> loyally shipping epiphany as its default browser and waiting for us to
> certify GIMP before they allow it into the default desktop install?
> -- Dan
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org

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