Re: Modulesets Reorganization

[Xavier Claessens <xclaesse gmail com>]

Le 02/06/10 08:50, Xavier Claessens a écrit :
> Also the current (already legacy?) method to propose an application in
> the GNOME desktop was a good opportunity to get community feedback, get
> more developers involved in the projects, and fix lots of GNOMEy issues
> the app could have. Also that was an opportunity for the app to move to
> the GNOME infrastructure. I take my experience with Empathy for this, we
> moved it to GNOME infrastructure in preparation of proposing it into
> desktop, it was a pain because of SVN but we did it (with new system I
> would certainly not have moved it to GNOME's SVN and would have kept it
> in Collabora's git). Also the first time I proposed Empathy it was
> rejected with a good list of reasons, those got worked on and that gave
> goals for the next 6months. That resulted in a better app proposed the
> next cycle and got approved. If we remove that module proposal for the
> desktop, things could have been different.

Another example I just though, again taking my experience with Empathy: 
Before proposing Empathy in GNOME desktop I (as Empathy maintainer) 
didn't know *anything* about accessibility. Proposing Empathy the first 
time resulted in some issues raised about accessibility because the few 
people that understand that are reading ddl module proposals, and tests 
applications proposed. Probably Empathy still has accessibility issues, 
and surely I still do not understand fully what should be done for that, 
but at least Empathy being officially part of GNOME generated interest 
about its accessibility and we got contributions in form of patches, bug 
reports, informative discussions, etc. If Empathy was hosted on, say, 
launchpad, and did not got through an approval process to get in GNOME 
desktop, I'm sure I still wouldn't know that accessibility exists in GNOME.

And Empathy is not the only example here, most app proposals ends in 
accessibility issues...

Regards,
Xavier Claessens.