Re: GNOME: lack of strategic roadmap

On Mon, 2010-02-15 at 19:26 +0000, Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:

> (This is offlist, but feel free to copy/reply onlist)
> If you're refering to the switch of certain mobile systems from Gtk to Qt, I
> think it's a bad idea to call it a "loss".  Our goal is to give software
> users freedom.  With free versions of Qt, they have freedom.  It's nice to
> see "our" system being used instead of any other system, and the choice of
> Qt over Gtk might indeed highlight some technical shortcomings which could
> be addressed in Gtk, but we still "win" when they use free versions of Qt.
> If you're refering to the fact that certain mobile devices have built their
> own proprietary systems instead of using Gtk, then I agree that this is a
> "loss".


My post was more about the need of defining the direction where we want
to go. We need to find a way to agree on the areas to be priorized for
improvement and figure out how to do as _community_, using all our
resources. So, if, for example, we set as priority to be a serious
option for mobile computing, we need to have a plan for that (I put this
as example, surely biased for the news of today and because the
componentized idea I like very much :). 

I'm happy to see that big companies choose free software, though I must
admit I'll be happier it they had choosen GNOME :) --The idea of making
components from GNOME applications could make possible to have a Qt
frontend for these applications--


-- Juanjo Marín

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]