Re: About GNOME 2.0 - The end of a dream

[Miguel de Icaza <miguel ximian com>]

> While it was a personal plan of the Bonobo maintainers to implement
> this, it was never a generally agreed upon plan for GNOME 2; we all
> agreed, in public discussion forums, that gnome-libs should use
> GConf

I did not agree.  Hence, your statement about `we all agreed' is
inaccurate. 

> I think Daniel may be right that GNOME could use a process for major
> architectural decisions, perhaps something like Sun's Architecture
> Review Committee. I guess there's a question of whether maintainers
> will be willing to put up with such a thing. There is also the problem
> that we don't appear to have a consistent vision for the architecture
> or even the requirements.

Yes, that is a good question.  

I personally know that I would not want to be told what to work on by
a committee that has not even bothered to research the problem. 

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