Re: [GnomeMeeting-devel-list] SIP and GnomeMeeting - please comment

[Damien Sandras <dsandras seconix com>]

Le lun 24/02/2003 à 00:29, Christian Rose a écrit :

> > 
> > Who said I was not happy with the GNOME libraries?
> 
> I interpreted your recent comments regarding GNOME sound that way.
> 

There is a difference between not being happy with ESD and not being
happy with the GNOME libraries. You are making generalities out of
particular cases.

> 
> > > improving libraries so that the situation is improved GNOME-wide, or at
> > > least make a tiny bit of effort to do so.
> > 
> > Do you mean Im not doing any effort to improve things in GNOME?
> 
> I don't know if it's true or not, but that sure is the impression I get.
> When asked about the problems with GNOME sound you mentioned, you
> replied you didn't even know if there were any relevant bug reports
> about the problems¹. Bug reports about the problems is the least one
> could expect from someone willing to improve things, I would think.
> 

Everybody is aware that ESD has to be replaced, there is no doubt about
that, and people are looking at replacing it. I don't see why I should
do a bug report about that.

> 
> > > When asked about why, you seem to take the stance that those libs have
> > > always sucked and will always suck as if they were set in stone,
> > 
> > I never said that, so please shut up instead of pretending I've said
> > things when it is not true. I hate when people tell I've said things
> > when I have not.
> 
> "People are telling me that since 2 years" was your reply to the point
> of GNOME dropping ESD in favor of something else. Based on that and the
> fact that you every time ESD is menioned slip in a comment about how it
> sucks, is hard to interpret as anything else than that you heavily
> dislike GNOME sound using ESD, haven't made any effort yourself to
> investigate or improve the state of things, don't expect it will ever be
> fixed, and expect others to fix it for you.

Yes I dislike GNOME sound using ESD, but that doesn't mean I dislike
GNOME libraries, which you affirmed after I told I wanted to make GNOME
libs totally optional in GnomeMeeting for people who want to compile it
on anything else than Linux. 

> 
> Believe it or not, I don't think it's fun claiming things about people
> out of thin air. So I don't do it. I've based the impressions I get on
> the actual impressions I get from your mails.

I would appreciate if you could keep your impressions for yourself, and
concentrate on doing interesting things for GNOME on your side instead
of flaming people on mailing lists with wrong arguments about wrong
problems and using wrong justifications.

> 
> 
> > The main reason to make GNOME optional in GnomeMeeting is to make ports
> > easier to other OS's and platforms.
> 
> Ok, that is a little more comforting. I got the impression, again based
> on several postings to this list, that the general intent with removing
> dependancies and duplicating things in many cases was to somehow help
> KDE users, which is difficult to grok since even KDE users can have
> GNOME libraries installed and never ever need to run GNOME.
> 
> That said, I'm still slightly worried that the general direction for the
> future will be a "GTKMeeting" rather than a "GnomeMeeting".
> 
> 
> Christian
> 
> 
> 
> ¹ http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnomemeeting-devel-list/2003-February/msg00065.html
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gnomemeeting-devel-list mailing list
> Gnomemeeting-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnomemeeting-devel-list
-- 
 _	Damien Sandras
(o-	GnomeMeeting: http://www.gnomemeeting.org/
//\	FOSDEM 2003:  http://www.fosdem.org
v_/_	H.323 phone:  callto://ils.seconix.com/dsandras seconix com
echo
'12245692587856285105409351sn[ln0=aln256%Pln256/snlbx]sb[q]salbxq'|dc