Re: GConf debate ... - the ironic hub.

[Michael Meeks <michael ximian com>]

Hi Havoc, 

        Apologies for not replying sooner.

        I never intended to tar the whole of 'Redhat' with this brush,
merely some of those still hacking on Gnome at the Redhat labs. So, let me
re-brand it the 'Owen/Havoc' - 'OH' position, the name is totaly   
immaterial.

> Michael Meeks <michael ximian com> writes:
> >     b) Why the Bonobo-conf design is disliked by the Gtk+ team.
> ....
> >     This for me is the key to understanding what I will call the
> > 'RedHat' position:
  
        So let me re-state the 'OH' position, I think it is a key to
understanding, and I just saw the amusing irony of it.

        You wish to totaly and unilaterly discard bonobo in favour of your
'Hub' project, which is as yet code-less but much talked about in private.
You "do not believe CORBA is the future", and thus go around trying to
ensure it is not used / exposed in GNOME [ or at least GConf ].

        Then you have the gall to complain that GConf is being dropped,
bemoan the duplication of effort, forking, wasting of time, lack of
testing, etc. etc.

        :-) incredible. We at least provided some constructive criticism,
and code to make GConf more acceptable for us - which was rejected before
we tackled the problem more robustly.

> If you want people to use Bonobo (and you're awfully insecure about
> that),
  
        So lets talk about Bonobo then, I'm almost certainly insecure [1].
People are welcome to use or not use it. I'd like to avoid FUD, and people
being deliberately discouraged from using CORBA / Bonobo for some
nebulous, badly planned, non-existant, vapourware 'Hub' that shows no
signs of arriving. eg. I understand Elliot was so demotivated by your
'O&H' FUD that he stopped hacking on ORBit2 in his spare time. Perhaps
Elliot and I are both insecure though - we like to see code, not waffle.

> why don't you focus on removing the complaints they have instead of on
> forcing people to use it by fiat and reimplementing/destabilizing code
> left and right.

        It may have escaped your notice that I have been working on ORBit2
for a while now, tackling one area of complaint - size, and bonobo2 /
gnome2. I am not aware of a substantial body of complaints being brought
to my attention though, please elaborate in bugzilla.
          
        So we have a choice - the O&H vision - a crippled,
non-componentized Gnome 2.0 [ leaving plenty of room for 'Hub', and plenty
of acutely bad, ageing, crumbling architecture to replace ] - this would
be the Gtk+ 2.0 & Gnome 1.4 proposal - a nightmare for maintainership, and
a horror to behold.

        Or, what we have been hacking on for a long while, trying to
realise the GNOME acronym, and bring the power of Bonobo to the developers
and users.

        I think the choice is quite simple, personaly. Of course, it's
entirely possible that I'm serialy deluding myself with paranoiac
conspiriacy theories, mis-remembered conversations, E-mail etc.

        Either way, I just want to get on with the work - if I may.

        Regards,

                Michael.

[1] - how I love pseudo-psychology.

-- 
 mmeeks gnu org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot