On Wed, 2011-11-30 at 14:15 +0100, Luca Ferretti wrote: > And, in suborder, why can't Boxes be simply a non-core, featured > application, just like GIMP or Simple Scan? Because there's a big difference between an integrated, designed, polished, documented and translated GNOME app and something that happens to use GTK, right? Just because it isn't targeted at core audience doesn't mean that it shouldn't be an awesome part of GNOME if you happen to be in an alternate space. You know, like IT professionals? We're getting *ransacked* out there in discussions in LUGs around the world (e.g. [1]) because power users are trying GNOME 3 have found it totally interferes with their accustomed workflows. Unhappy campers. If people in LUGs have the idea that GNOME 3 is no use for them, do you really think they're going to push for its adoption in the wider company that they have to support? So the whole discussion about whether Boxes is core or not is ridiculous. If it meets the standards of being a good GNOME app (HIG, oh HIG, where art thou HIG) then it should be endorsed and promoted. Period. AfC Sydney [1] http://lists.slug.org.au/archives/slug/2011/11/msg00026.html but I've seen similar conversations in at least three other countries.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part