[GnomeMeeting-devel-list] Re: Remove GnomeMeeting from Gnome module list?

[danilo gnome org (Danilo Šegan)]

Hi Damien,

Today at 20:52, Damien Sandras wrote:

> 1.0.1 has been released *especially* for GNOME.

I know, that's the one we actually bothered you about.  I didn't
expect to have to do it with every future release as well :(
Apparently, we should have.

> No strings were added between 1.0.1 and 1.0.2. Was there a reason to do
> a 1.0.3 release in time with 2.8? Perhaps, perhaps not. Next time I will
> do one.

This is kind of commitment I was also looking for.  Alas, not only
that, but if we had this, I'd probably never be tempted to complain.
Doing 1.2 months before g2.10 is due, just kind of prompted me.

> I have not received such a mail. I'm sorry. Have you tried getting an
> answer? Have you mailed gnomemeeting-devel-list gnome org about that?
> No, instead you asked for removal of the module.

Hey, I didn't ask for it to be removed from Gnome CVS, be forbidden
for use or whatever.  Being in a module list is a commitment IMO,
commitment you're not ready to take.  I already said that GnomeMeeting
is excellent piece of software.  But I also think Gimp and Gnumeric
are excellent pieces of software, and they don't follow Gnome release
schedule, and are not included in Gnome: does that make them any
worse?  Of course not.

FWIW, Gnome release schedule might be bad for GnomeMeeting and you,
since it's taking too much of your time in doing unneeded
admistrativia.

> All releases are announced on gnome-i18n. How could I have updated
> translations otherwise? Fabrice Alphonso is actually managing this since
> more than one year.

You can get your translations anytime, since gnomemeeting (along with
any other software in Gnome CVS) is listed on l10n-status.gnome.org,
so translators can see the status of all the modules there, including
gnomemeeting (it's per-language, which is a bit bad for maintainers,
since module maintainers can't see the stats per-module).

GTP tends to be most active during string freeze periods, which means
that if you release along with the rest of Gnome, you're more likely
to have translators available willing to work on your stable software
releases.

>> That's just fine.  What's important is that you've *never* aligned
>> with GNOME schedule.  How come 1.2 came out month ago, and not in time
>> for 2.10?  Ok, we can argue this is only "version naming" issue, but
>
> Who said I wouldn't do 1.2.1 or 1.2.2 for GNOME 2.10?

That was not my point.  Elijah got what I meant, so it's perhaps
better to continue discussion by responding to his message, which is
not directly related to GnomeMeeting--if you're interested, of
course.

> Nobody said it had to be benificial either.

Uhm, right.  That might have been my bad in assuming that the reason
for proposing GnomeMeeting for Gnome was actually to benefit from it
somehow (both Gnome and GnomeMeeting).  I agree that it probably isn't
written down anywhere :)

> OK, I am not able to follow the GNOME schedule for stable releases.
> Please remove me from the modules list.

Don't take this so personally.  It's not about *you* in the module
list, it's about GnomeMeeting.  I very much respect what you do, and
never wanted to offend you.  I have recommended GnomeMeeting to so
many people, and I'll recommend it in the future as well.  I'm not
saying this just for the sake of being polite, I actually mean and do
that.  Also, with GnomeMeeting being highly complex piece of software,
it's not going to get any competitors in Gnome area soon, so it would
still be recommended to everyone, was it in official Gnome or not.

It just seems that Gnome schedule is not working out for you (I don't
consider this a bad thing--it might even be a good thing--but it's bad
to force something like that).  Lets hear others' say on this, so we
can conclude this topic :)

FWIW, I don't want GnomeMeeting to be removed if everybody else feels
it should stay in: it certainly brings in a lot of value to the desktop,
so everyone can weight in pros and cons on their own: I did mine,
which resulted in my original mail on the topic (and this should
explain why I didn't do it any sooner: I very much wanted to have
GnomeMeeting in Gnome).

Thanks for your understanding,
Danilo