Re: Decoupling GNOME Office?
- From: rms39 columbia edu (Russell Steinthal)
- To: gnome-hackers gnome org
- Cc: gnome-1 4-list gnome org, gnome-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Decoupling GNOME Office?
- Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:00:15 -0400
[Note: The CC: list had gotten sufficiently ridiculous that I trimmed
all of the individuals off of it, leaving only *3* mailing lists.
-RMS]
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 18:54:56 EDT, Jody Goldberg wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 04:01:22PM -0400, Pat Eyler wrote:
>>
>> I'd far rather see a separate relase of GNOME Office (G.O.) a bit
after
>> the 1.4 GNOME release. Certainly the 1.4 release would need to
include
>> the infrastructure bits (guppi et al.) that G.O. will depend on.
My
>> reasons are:
>> * I'd rather see G.O. listed as a 1.0 release - it hasn't gone
through
> ^^^^^
>
>I'd rather not do that. Gnumeric is not ready for a 1.0 release.
>The Bonobo version is still not built as the default.
If the gnumeric developers, whose project is arguably the most
advanced/stable of all of the Gnome Office components, are hesitant
to go to 1.0, what does that say about the rest of the "suite"?
(No offense intended to the developers involved: the GNOME Office
projects are just all relatively immature, AFAIK.)
I'd like to see a GNOME Office "release", if only to encourage people
to play with/develop the apps, but perhaps we should figure out a way
to do that without coordinating version numbers, giving it a release
number, etc.
-Russell
--
Russell Steinthal Columbia Law School, Class of 2002
<rms39@columbia.edu> Columbia College, Class of 1999
<steintr@nj.org> UNIX System Administrator, nj.org
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]