Re: New modules in 2.14

[Davyd Madeley <davyd madeley id au>]

Quoting David Zeuthen <david fubar dk>:

> What is the point here? Most distributions nowadays either support only
> GNOME or KDE; sure, they ship the other, but focus on just one of them.
> Personally I think that is fine.. We'll get kick-ass GNOME distros and
> kick-ass KDE distros.

> Also.. do you really think the GNOME and KDE people can agree on a
> settings format for said system daemon? I think it would be a mistake.
> Also, from a more pragmatic point of view... Is it worth splitting e.g.
> g-p-m into two daemons simply to feed settings from gconf from one to
> the other? I think the answer to this question is no.

Personally, I always imagined a system that functioned more like 
NetworkManager.

Which brings me to another point. NetworkManager is not part of Desktop. We
leave it up to vendors to decide whether or not NetworkManager should be
shipped, or should be shipped by default.

Additionally, while we have heard that Ubuntu, SuSE and Fedora will be 
shipping
g-p-m in their next distribution, have we heard anything from our other
non-Linux, non-HAL-enabled brethren? Having hard dependancies on 
something like
g-p-m, which has hard dependancies on HAL, which in turn doesn't (yet) work on
Solaris (I think) sounds like a world of pain it would be really nice 
to avoid.

Then there is AIX, HP-UX, IRIX, and every other UNIX someone is building GNOME
for...

--d