Re: New module proposal: LightDM

[Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org>]

On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 17:41 -0400, 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.
> _______________________________________________

even though I don't have real data here, I must say that I know Robert
has been working on GDM a lot of time, so this is not fair really.

Also, AFAIK, most distributions carry an insane amount of patches in
their GDM packages, so that seems to mean something (not sure what
though, not an expert on login managers myself).

So, maybe other considerations for rejecting LightDM might apply, but
for sure Robert's attempts to work on GDM to fix issues there does not
apply at all.

cheers