On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 22:36 +0200, Frederic Peters wrote: > Seif Lotfy wrote: > > > So I would still like to have my question answered. How is the policy > > on using Zeitgeist for non-feature and non-UX related optimization and > > maintenance distribution? > > Do note this was not discussed by the release team, we'll have a > meeting soon and we can add that to the agenda if you want an official > answer, but in my opinion there is no problem if a maintainer wants to > use zeitgeist because it helps in whatever s/he is coding. As an example, Seif has asked me to clarify that libfolks is happy to have Zeitgeist as a hard dependency if other core modules also have Zeitgeist as a hard dependency. In the meantime, we plan to have Zeitgeist as a soft dependency (just like most of our other dependencies) since it isn't used for too much in folks at the moment, and it's another thing which people would otherwise be forced to build before they could build folks for themselves. See https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=672709 for details on Zeitgeist + folks. Philip > Fred > _______________________________________________ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list gnome org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part