Re: The State of GNOME

Albert Strasheim <> writes:

| I don't know how much of this instability is to be blamed on Gtk+/GLib
| [which has really turned into a mess with the 1.0/1.1 issues], but it's
| still most horrible.

Well now 1.2 is here...

| I'm sure Red Hat is feeling some commercial pressure to push out a mature
| desktop product with Red Hat 6.0, but at this time GNOME 1.0 isn't it. Red
| Hat could end up doing serious damage to their own name [think 5.1 with
| it's 20+ errata entries, just worse], and the name of the GNOME project.

I think that RH 5.1 helped clear out a lot of bugs. None else dared to
release glibc stuff at that time. Debian just hid in their Cathedral
overlooking the Bazaar from afar and Suse was doing other important
things at the time. Both have later made the transition to glibc if
I'm not very much mistaken.

| The worst thing about receiving flames from KDE'ers would be that they
| have a valid point. :)

I don't see any point in having a war with the KDE people. It would be
much nicer if KDE and GNOME software could talk to each other.
| I'll leave you with a simple analogy.
| GNOME is like a game of Gnometris [one of the games that work, and one
| with an author that replies to my mail :)]. You start out on level 1, and

Would you rather have the developers respond to 500+ mails a day or to
code ?
| The state of GNOME 1.0 is a troubling affair. At least, in my mind. I want
| GNOME to krush KDE and wipe Windows, not get crushed and wiped by
| aforementioned products.

Why on earth is THAT a goal? 

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]