Re: Putting the 'Mono debate' back on the rails

[Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org>]

<quote who="Vincent Untz">

> >   - does it *need* to go in the Desktop suite at all? (genuine question,
> >   it may not be necessary to include Tomboy in the Desktop suite to
> >   achieve Tomboy's goals)
> 
> I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand this point. It might help to know
> what are Tomboy's (or Alex's) goals first :-)

It's the same thing as "does Inkscape *need* to go in the Desktop suite at
all?" -> there are all kinds of reasons for and against this from both sides
(maintainer and suite).

> >   - can we resolve the dissonance between delivering a coherent Desktop (a
> >     goal of the Desktop suite) and suggesting that vendors deliver multiple
> >     vm/language/binding/runtime platforms to satisfy it, and demand that
> >     users stomach it too? (this has also been raised as a performance issue)

> You forgot Alvaro's feeling that GNOME is a platform and adding dependency
> on another platform might not make sense from a consistency point of view.
> (Point four is similar, but it's not the same.)

Yeah, I was attempting to summarise that in point 4, though understanding
that it was heavily conflated with the long term platform story. Shipping
something in the Desktop suite doesn't imply supporting the platform (cf.
Aisleriot), so there's some flexibility here.

- Jeff

-- 
linux.conf.au 2007: Sydney, Australia           http://lca2007.linux.org.au/
 
    "Basically my philosophy on release management is that it should be
                like police brutality." - Maciej Stachowiak