Re: New module proposal: LightDM

[Brian Cameron <brian cameron oracle com>]

Colin:

Your report missed the following bug, which is a better example of some
of the more serious issues Canonical had working with upstream GDM:

  https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=587750

As you can see in the bug report, Robert was not provided with much
real support or guidance about how to move forward even though
Canonical made it clear on numerous occasions (on gdm-list and to the
board) that this bug was of particular concern to Canonical and their
users.

Brian


On 05/13/11 04:41 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Robert Ancell<robert ancell gmail com>  wrote:
> > There have been problems for years and years and years.  There is some
> > point where you need to reconsider if that strategy is appropriate.
>
> So here's some actual data:
>
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?cf_gnome_target=---;cf_gnome_version=---;query_format=advanced;emaillongdesc1=1;bug_status=UNCONFIRMED;bug_status=NEW;bug_status=ASSIGNED;bug_status=REOPENED;bug_status=NEEDINFO;bug_status=RESOLVED;bug_status=VERIFIED;email1=robert.ancell%40gmail.com;product=gdm;emailtype1=substring
>
> It looks like to your credit, you have submitted patches; some like
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=596831 have been accepted,
> others like https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=593996
> discussed, considered, and rejected.  The latter one is obsoleted now
> by the accounts service anyways.
>
> I'm not convinced by this data that GDM has been a problematic code
> base to work on.  You're obviously free to create a new project; but
> on the basis above, I'd say you really didn't try very hard to make
> real changes in GDM before deciding to rewrite from scratch.
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list