Re: Proposing Tracker for inclusion into GNOME 2.18

[Steve Frécinaux <nudrema gmail com>]

David Prieto wrote:

> This is not directly related to the topic, but is there any way that I 
> can still propose Mathusalem for inclusion into 2.18?
>
> http://tw.apinc.org/weblog/2006/05/26#summer-of-code-acceptance (just in 
> case you don't know what I'm talking about).

I'm *against* mathusalem inclusion for 2.18. Reason is that I won't have 
enough time to bring it to an usable state now due to my other 
activities, and to be fair it needs some heavy rework.

Moreover, having it part of the gnome release that early would mean that 
it would have to respect freezes... That wouldn't be very practical... 
It's *not* a finished/stable project.

I would instead propose to see if I can do anything good from now to 
2.18 release, and then use it as an optional dependency for projects 
that want to. And then maybe propose it for 2.20.

One-Line Summary: I'm strongly against that idea as for now.

--
Steve