Re: control center plans, etc.

[Chema Celorio <chema ximian com>]

On 20 Jun 2001 15:06:34 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
...
> make sense for us to support tools that have a lot of complexity tied
> to working on HPUX or something in addition to our own OS. And it

Some distributions have told us that they would like to drop their
config tools for XST, obviously the ones that don't have a good set of
tools already.

But from a user perspective this is great, they will know how to
configure their box when running GNOME, no matter what OS/distro he/she
is using.

> Anyway, I guess I feel obligated to also say that we haven't made XST
> an "official part of GNOME" yet either - at the moment it's still an
> add-on package. If we were voting on that, I might feel that XST is
> kind of a waste of time because OS vendors in general just don't want
> that feature, but I also might abstain from the vote since I obviously
> have a Red Hat interest in the topic (basically, it's more engineering
> work for us if we have to strip the XST dependency from the upstream
> sources).

Well, i don't think that OS vendors not wanting a feature is an issue
here. Because users DO WANT it and we should care more about the users
thant what OS vendors want. HOWEVER : Please don't respond to this
paragraph. I don't thikn we need this political discussion just yet, XST
Is not finished. When we finish XST we can revisit this issue. I
strongly believe XST should be an integral part of GNOME, but if
possible i would not like to discuss it just yet (I have LOTS of work to
do ;-))

regards,
Chema



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