Re: Website ideas

[Paul McGarry <mcgarry tig com au>]

Ryan Muldoon wrote:

> > I would choose not to include 'normal' gtk-only software any more. This
> > will probably be not so nice for those that currently announce their
> > software on gtk.org. A quick look at www.gtk.org/apps shows that a lot of
> > the software there is old (1999 or earlier), and that most of the newer
> > software has at least optional gnome support. I think it is better to have
> > a high quality list with only robust and/or actively being developed
> > software then a list with outdated software and broken links.
> >
> we definitely need gtk software too.......just include it in a gtk listing, not
> in a gnome listing.

I think keeping GTK stuff out of the GNOME listing is silly, bordering
on 
insane. I don't see how it helps the end user at all. Firstly two parts
of 
the GNOME office are pretty much GTK apps (GIMP and Dia). Where would we
be 
without The GIMP? Secondly there must be loads of little applications
where 
GTK+ is a perfectly appropriate choice. 

Surely we wish to present the most feature filled desktop we can to the
end 
users. I see no reason why we should not have XMMS on the GNOME applist
for
example, simply because it doesn't link to libgnome. Likewise for gFTP.

GTK only does not mean low quality. A good applist should have a way of
showing the quality of the apps in it (such as the development status on
Sourceforge). It should also show whether an app is GTK, GTK w/ GNOME
enhancements or GNOME, but it should be one non-exclusionary list.

People should be able to browse that list in a way that suits them (ie
if they only want GTK we should be capable of showing only GTK and
GTK w/ GNOME enhancements apps) but we should not be enforcing any such
thing as policy.

Surely it is easier to maintain one list as well, particularly as GTK
apps do become 'GNOME enhanced' or full GNOME apps.

Paul McGarry