Re: Minutes of the GNOME Board meeting 16 October 2001

[linas linas org (Linas Vepstas)]

On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 01:29:01PM +0100, Glynn Foster was heard to remark:
> Linas Vepstas wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 07:58:48PM +0200, Rodrigo Moya was heard to remark:
> > > On Thu, 2001-10-18 at 19:56, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2001 at 12:31:38PM -0400, Daniel Veillard was heard to remark:
> > > > >  - Update on GNOME 2
> > > >
> > > > I have no clue on how to port to gnome-2.0.
> > >
> > > yes, they're in CVS, module vicious-build-scripts. That's what you want
> > > to compile a GNOME 2 environment. There's a README which explains what
> > > you've got to do.
> >
> > Hmm, OK, am trying ... but the meta-issue is -- can't someone just
> > add this to the http://developer.gnome.org/dotplan/ URL ??
> 
> Okay, did a bit of work on d.g.o this morning. Removed some of the old cruft that
> Martin
> did months ago and for now added a doc about the vbs to
> http://developer.gnome.org/dotplan/notes
> Hopefully people will start putting more useful docs there [ie. all the changes to X
> from 1.4 to 2.0 docs
> that currently just reside in CVS].

Hmm, OK, well then, thanks.  I think I need to apologize at least in
part, since appearently some of that info was there, under my nose, and
I didn't see it.

Can I make two navigational suggestions? Part of my
trap was that I wasn't really paying attention to what was going on in
the table-of-contents sidebar.  I was expecting the critical info to 
be listed in the main panel on  http://developer.gnome.org/dotplan/

For speed readers such as me, who don't have the patience to navigate
a site deeply, I strongly suggest posting/repeating the important links 
in the main panel.  Side panels tend to be advertising crap, and usualy
take you back up in the site, not down, and that's why I ignored it ... 

I also didn't bother to chase the link 'older dot.plan news...'
since I thought to myself, 'oh, that's obsolete archives & stuff,
pointless to look there, since clearly gnome-2.0 is new, not old.'

Imagine my chagrin to find relevant news there.  I strongly urge that
news relevent to gnome-2.0 be kept on the first page until it really is
obsolete.  That the gnome-2.0 build notes were posted 6 months ago
doesn't make them old: after all, the very first gnome-2.0 alpha came
out only a week ago.


So like I said, maybe I'm a clod for not really having noticed this
stuff ... but in my defense, I'll say only that I can't be the only one
who is navigationally impaired out  there ...

--linas


-- 
pub  1024D/01045933 2001-02-01 Linas Vepstas (Labas!) <linas linas org>
PGP Key fingerprint = 8305 2521 6000 0B5E 8984  3F54 64A9 9A82 0104 5933