Re: About GNOME 2.0 - The end of a dream

[Dietmar Maurer <dietmar ximian com>]

Daniel Veillard wrote:

> > Using a formal process only removes the responsibility from the maintainer,
>
>   No it makes him responsible for following the plan, i.e. give him more
> weight actually. If the gconf change had been planned before hand then Martin
> very simple answer would have been "we decided this, this was the plan",
> and he would have been in a far better position to defend himself.
> In fact nobody would have objected at that point, and this accident would
> not have happened.

Using monikers to access configuration was planned a long time ago. I think most people
know bonobo/doc/Monikers. So I consider that not as a evil decision we made, instead it
is part of a plan we made public available a long time ago (I will ignore any mail
stating not knowing that document)

- Dietmar


_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers