Re: 2.4 Module List and Rationale (aka GEP10 and 11)

[John Fleck <jfleck inkstain net>]

On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 18:15, Luis Villa wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 20:13, Glynn Foster wrote:
[snip]
> > 
> > This is absolutely cool stuff - I'd like to tentatively add 'zenity' and
> > 'battfink' to the list.
> > 
[snip]
> 
> So, each of these raises an interesting question that I don't really
> have an answer to: what do we do when a proposed new module (actually a
> replacement) is quite possibly a regression from the module being
> replaced? Under what conditions do we allow that? 
> 

I think the terminal widget and html widget discussions elsewhere have
suggested at least part of the answer - if the old one is unmaintained
and the new one has a maintainer, that weighs heavily in favor of the
new one even if it's current state of being is a regression.

Cheers,
John
-- 
John Fleck
jfleck inkstain net (h) jfleck abqjournal com (w)
http://www.inkstain.net http://www.abqjournal.com

"Sometimes, a diner is all about the mac and cheese." 
  - Zippy the Pinhead

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