Re: [gnome-love] GNOME Utilities :: Needs a maintainer



Hi all,

Somehow this mail went to my spam folder, I discovered it while doing
slight checks before emptying it... I guess it was my fault, so I'm
deeply sorry :/

On Sat, 2004-10-30 at 11:34 -0300, James Bowes wrote:
> Hi Carlos,
> 
> On Fri, 2004-29-10 at 17:35 +0200, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> 
> > Sorry for not answering before, I completely forgot this mail :(
> > 
> > Just wanted to say that I agree a lot, I'd love to see at least a
> > collaboration framework between projects/tools related to sysadmin, if
> > there's anything I can do to help... :)
> > 
> 
> I'm one of the new maintainers of gnome-utils, and I know we'd love to
> work with you to make gnome-system-log even better, whether that
> involves moving g-s-l into the system tools, or making use of the
> gnome-system-tools backends. Anyways, if you want to talk more about it,
> we've set up a gnome-utils list (gnome-utils-list gnome org). Most
> (well, all) of the recent (and in my opinion, awesome) work on
> gnome-system-log has been done by Vincent Noel (vnoel cox net). He
> probably has the best idea of what's going on inside the g-s-l.

I'd really like to see some integration, but I've got a little question:
is it really worth to drop almost all the code in favour of gst
architecture? moving to it will imply huge changes in your code (moving
all the hard logic to the backends, which are written in perl, and
making the frontend a simple GUI for it.

If the answer is yes, I wouldn't mind at all to provide the neccessary
framework in the GST for it, backend-wise and frontend-wise, and even
collaborate as much as I can in making it possible :)

If the asnwer is no, then just a collaboration framework would be cool,
we might be thinking and pushing for a common authentication platform,
common UI guidelines, a common control-center place/structure... etc,
which is really necessary too for all our tools

Nice to know about your list, I've just subscribed :)

	Carlos

> Hope to hear from you soon,
> 
I'm sorry that this hasn't happened :(




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