Re: GNOME 2.0 Schedule

[Sander Vesik <Sander Vesik Sun COM>]

Note: I speak for only myself.

On 11 Oct 2001, Christian Schaller wrote:

> On Thu, 2001-10-11 at 12:40, STEPHEN BROWNE wrote:
> > 
> > Releasing often is fine as long as it is mainly for bug fixes
> > and there is no API breakage or significant UI breakages.
> 
> <SNIP>
>  
> > I dont know about other Gnome distributors, but from a SUN point of view
> > I would really really not like to deliver multiple versions of libs
> > (because porting didnt happen on time) and/or change (possibly
> > radically?)
> > the UI shortly after a fully supported release.
> > 
> > Support costs would go through the roof. 
> 
> Eeeck! I don't know what you qualify as major UI breakages or changes,
> but if you are suggesting a UI freeze for GNOME between 2.0 and 3.0 I
> will have to protest. Changing fast and having a low threshold for

I can't see a complete UI freeze inbetween gnome releases as benefiting
anybody at all in the world. Among other things it would put all the
authors who decide to give in after a 3 month long email bomboing campaign
by the Gnome Usability Project and fix the gross bugs in a really awkward
situation. 

> accepting improvements has always been a winning factor for Free
> Software. So while I could support a stance that we will not change the
> way the GNOME desktop works in a radical way for instance from todays
> way to a NextStepish interface except as part of major releases, I do
> think that we must allow more incremental improvements/changes to be
> added to desktop, like for instance a new panel implementation(which I
> would suspect to share many of the attributes of the current one if it
> where to appear) or improved gnome-utils for instance.
> 
> If Sun feels such changes are not acceptable then I suggest Sun holds
> onto the old version for themselves, but asking the GNOME project as a
> whole to stop going forward will be the kiss of death if agreed to.
> 

I have no idea how sun feels, except I really can't see it wanting UI
freeze inbetween major releases (I can already see how billh and many
others would think of even suggesting such a thing). Lets face it - gnome
UI is not all that good, and it is in everybodies intrest to not freeze it
as it stands for all that long periods of time, as that grossly inhibits
improving all the gross parts of it.

> As for API changes I am much more sympatic to your view as long as it
> restricts itself to changes not additions, but then again that has  been
> the policy up to now anyway.
> 
> Christian
> 

	Sander

I haven't been vampired. You've been Weatherwaxed.


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