Re: Fallback / Classic Mode

[Brian Cameron <brian cameron oracle com>]

Allan:

> > Note that if sysadmins feel that we are going to give up on them, they
> > may start looking into alternatives. We need to be clear that we want
> > them to stick to 2.x/classic for now and that we are going to think
> > about them in future releases.
>
> Sysadmins in general, or sysadmins in the contexts that Brian wrote
> about? I'm unaware of plans to tackle either of these...

This issue only affects sysadmins who might want users to use Fallback
or Classic mode.  Such environments are likely only a small percentage
of GNOME users.

While definitely a minority, these users are important since they tend
to be businesses, educational facilities, government institutions,
important customers of distros that ship GNOME, etc.  These are the
sorts of users who tend to do things like run multi-user servers.
Important users, but not the sorts of users who are going to be
rushing to run bleeding edge software anyway.  These users instead tend
to run stable and supported releases.

My understanding was that GNOME 3.0 was simply not targeting these
users, and that the expectation was that Fallback/Classic mode would
be ready for such users in a forthcoming release.  To me, it makes
sense for GNOME to first focus on the more common-case GNOME users
for the GNOME 3.0 release (e.g. desktop/laptop/notebook users).  By
the time GNOME 3.x starts being released in a supported fashion by
major distros, I am sure the Fallback/Classic mode issues will be
resolved.

I would not think it should be so controversial to just make this clear
to users, make sure we set expectations honestly, and avoid confusion.

Brian