Re: Nautilus documentation update
- From: Shaun McCance <shaunm gnome org>
- To: karderio gmail com
- Cc: gnome-doc-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Nautilus documentation update
- Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 12:39:46 -0600
On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 10:37 +0100, karderio wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 14:11 -0600, Shaun McCance wrote:
> > > I noticed .../gnome-user-docs/gnome-users-guide is the 1.4
> > > documentation, is that because GNOME 1 is still maintained in CVS ?
> > The intention was that they would be two separate
> > documents, so that you could have both Gnome 1 and
> > Gnome 2 installed in parallel. I doubt many people
> > are even trying to do that these days.
> > Given that we can't even manage to maintain our
> > current documentation, there's really little hope
> > that Gnome 1 documentation would ever be maintained.
> > It's not installed or put in the tarball, so it's
> > just a relic in CVS.
> Are relics good (like the things they try to sell you In Lourdes or the
> Vatican) ? Or should we try to get rid of them (like many governments do
> with the elderly and unuseful) ?
> Please excuse th cynical remarks ;)
Well, so, we take backwards compatibility reasonably
seriously in Gnome. We put more effort into it than
most other Free Software projects. See, for instance,
my comments elsewhere about maintaining old IDs.
But we basically made a clean break from Gnome 1, and
there's really no point in maintaining Gnome 1 stuff
on HEAD, or in putting it in our current releases.
If people want to maintain Gnome 1 stuff, then they
can work on a Gnome 1 branch in CVS. There is really
no need to keep the old User Guide on HEAD.
] [Thread Prev