Re: Release questions...

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 19:55 +0100, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 12:33 -0600, Elijah Newren wrote:
> > On 8/16/05, Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2005-08-08 at 23:05 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
> > > > On 8/8/05, Elijah Newren <newren gmail com> wrote:
> > > > > - pyorbit is not listed among the modules in the bindings release.
> > > > > However, gnome-python is.  gnome-python can be built without pyorbit,
> > > > > but only certain parts of it.  The strange thing is that libgnomeui,
> > > > > libbonobo, libbonoboui are all listed as subparts of gnome-python that
> > > > > are in the bindings yet those are the parts that cannot be built
> > > > > without pyorbit.  Something is wrong there.    Should pyorbit be in
> > > > > the bindings release, or should the gnome-python set not list so many
> > > > > submodules on the wiki?
> > > >
> > > > Murray?
> > > 
> > > I roughly remember that we noticed last time too that we forgot this. I
> > > might have asked Johan Dahlin to propose it on d-d-l. I think it's
> > > stable (though possibly not very useful), as is the gnome-python stuff
> > > that uses it. Johan, I guess it would be best to just ignore this for
> > > now and retro-propose pyorbit for 2.13/14.
> > 
> > According to James, gnome-python isn't useful without pyorbit
> > (http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=313246#c3).  If that's
> > accurate (I guess that depends on your view of usefulness of
> > libgnomeui and bonobo* vs. libgnome gnomecanvas, gnomevfs, and gconf,
> > which I by no means would qualify as an expert to judge), then we
> > should probably either have pyorbit proposed for addition in 2.13/2.14
> > or else have gnome-python proposed for removal.
> 
>   Let's not propose gnome-python for removal, please :)
>  
>   I don't think it will hurt to propose pyorbit.  The problem with
> pyorbit is that no one is really developing it.  This is partially due
> to the overall change of strategy of GNOME wrt ORBit2.  But it works
> well, and has few bug reports.  Even if not developed, it is rather
> useful as is.

I can not imagine anyone objecting to pyorbit and we can't remove
gnome-python. It's just a bureaucratic step because people complain if
we don't do the bureaucratic steps.

-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com