Re: GNOME 1.4 extra apps coordinators

[Dan Mueth <d-mueth uchicago edu>]

On Sun, 22 Oct 2000, Ian Peters wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 01:56:55PM +0800, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
> > > I'm not sure what to do about the GNOME applets situation -- we
> > > currently ship a large number of applets in the GNOME applets package,
> > > and I think Maciej is write that some of these should be broken out.
> > > 
> > > However, if we are going to ship extra applets, I'm definitely against
> > > shipping them in one large bunch called gnome-applets-extra.  Ship
> > > them individually, so that users can choose which to install.
> > > 
> > > Regarding games -- I'm also the GNOME games maintainer, and I think
> > > that we currently ship more than enough small, simple games in the
> > > gnome-games package.  If additional games have been written and are
> > > ready to be released, they can, individually, be part of the extra
> > > apps release.
> >
> > I'm all for the GNOME "core" releases to be for applications that are
> > necessary for just about every user of the GNOME desktop.  As
> > gnome-applets and gnome-games are part of this GNOME "core", they should
> > be a brief set of almost universally useful applets, and perhaps the
> > "most popular" games.  It should be feasible to have other "sets" of
> > GNOME games and applets that are released about the same time as the
> > "core" of GNOME, but these would basically just be a list of a set of
> > individual packages, or a "meta" package for those who are using Debian.
> > While I'm at it, I'd like to see the software map done in a similar
> > fasion, as the current categories suck.  Why not break them up the way
> > that they appear on the main menu, or by some criteria with less
> > overlap?  I know this isn't a 1.4 issue, but it goes along with some of
> > the issues that have been raised here.  While I'm at it,  selecting
> > applications is going to become part of the duties of the GNOME
> > foundation's board, if I read that correctly.  I'd like to see the
> > discussions remain open, and on dedicated lists like this one, so that
> > all parties can have their say.  

[SNIP]

> For my opinion, I believe that assembling meta-packages, grouping
> things together, etc. should be the domain of the distributions and
> vendors.  As you say, Debian already implements a fine solution -- for
> example, if you install gnome-games on a Debian system, it is actually
> a meta-package which pulls in things like gnome-iagno,
> gnome-same-gnome, gnome-gnibbles, etc.
> 
> However, I don't see that approach making sense for the extra apps
> release.  The way I see my role, it is to help coordinate the authors
> of GNOME applications that are not considered part of the core, so
> that when GNOME 1.4 comes out, we can point people to a list on a web
> page or an ftp server and say, "Here are a bunch of apps that have
> been released and will work well with your GNOME 1.4 system."

I am still for having gnome-xxx-extras packages. I promise not to scream
and shout if everybody disagrees, but I will try to explain why.

The main reason is for the user.  Right now the user has a hard time
finding additional good applications for their system.  The software map
helps some, but it is somewhat tricky to navigate.  A search feature would
help here.  Once one does find an application they want, the quality is
completely random.  The application could be long abandoned, only
available in certain packages (eg. only tgz), and while I haven't done a
careful survey, my impression is that there is little translation or
even documentation of these packages.  Having all of the applications
seperate means the user must find, download, install, and test each
application and hope for the best.  Having a single package of tested and
supported applications would help a lot here.

Now having the extra apps will help, since a certain level of QA will be
done on these packages before giving them the "stamp of approval" of the
extra apps coordinators.  Will the extra apps coordinators make sure each
app is available in tgz, rpm, and deb packages?  This would be very nice,
but would take some work.  We also would like to have documentation and
translations for each package.

This leads me to the other group having gnome-xxx-extras packages serves -
the developers.  If we put these packages in CVS, then everybody can work
together on them.  Hackers can go in and fix bugs.  Doc writers can go in
and add docs.  Translators can go in and add translations.  Packagers can
make debs or RPMS. Et cetera.  While developers have the best intentions,
experience shows that in many cases they are typically so busy that they
are slow and unreliable at integrating documentation, translations,
patches, etc. which people send them by email.  CVS works *much* better in
my experience.  Overall I think the workload is reduced and the quality is
improved if these apps reside in GNOME CVS where everybody can work
together on them.

If people were strongly against packaging them as gnome-xxx-extras, we
could solve many of these problem by releasing them individually and (1)
having the extra apps coordinators do QA and make sure they are packaged
in various formats, and (2) putting them in GNOME CVS so the doc writers,
packagers, translators, hackers, etc. can work together on them.

Dan