Re: libcanberra as an external dependency

[Olav Vitters <olav bkor dhs org>]

On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 05:31:17PM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> > How clear should a deprecation be? IMO it clearly states that although
> > we won't break esd, we recommend that new apps switch to something else
> > when it is available. This is like gvfs, we're moving away from it.
> 
> What's not clear is what that SOMETHING ELSE is.  When gnome-vfs was

I CAN HEAR YOU VERY MUCH THANK YOU.

> deprecated, gvfs/gio were already part of the GNOME Desktop/Platform.
> There was clear direction on where to move.  There is no other
> recommended sound server option.  Since the Desktop hasn't yet switched
> to something new, I think it is reasonable to assume that compatibility
> should be maintained for the current sound server.

Something new is now available, and we're switching to it. There was a
lot of time between deprecation and the new part. I don't see why that
is a bad thing. It was known for a long time something new was wanted.
Now it was found and the switch happens.
I don't see why if a switch from 2.22 to 2.24 without any pre
announcement would've been better. 

Pulseaudio for the sound server stuff, libcanberra for replacing the
libgnome parts.

I'm open for suggestions, but to me it seems strange that knowing in
advance something will change is considered worse than changing without
any pre announce.

-- 
Regards,
Olav