On Mon, 2008-03-03 at 15:59 +0100, Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > What most of the developers agree on is that we don't want yet another > major version bump that means all apps using GNOME platform need to be > practically rewritten, like the gtk 1.2 -> gtk2 transition. You still > see great apps using the old gtk eight years later. That's what we know > wouldn't work. > > If you look at the GNOME 2 offerings, we have done some major > restructuring and cleaning without having to break anything in any major > way. We've come up with cairo and pushed it beneath pango and gtk+. > Introduced gstreamer all over the stack. Switched to gtk-printing. > Switching to gio/gvfs right now. That's the kind of reason why people > get on the defensive when someone say GNOME 3.0, because more often than > not it means they just have a version number in mind, and no real plans. > Like they say, version numbers are cheap, show me the code :P. Right! I've long mused that we can start discussing a 3.0 when we have the option of compiling GNOME trunk without the gnome libs, bonobo, etc.. At that point there can be two releases, one that /should/ be smaller and faster that only supports apps without legacy API, and a legacy release that supports all 2.x apps. We might release the two versions concurrently for a year for apps to migrate their code. -- __C U R T I S C. H O V E Y_______ Guilty of stealing everything I am.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part