Re: GNOME Productivity release set

> On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 02:25 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
>> On Sat, 2005-06-11 at 15:43 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
>> > On Sat, 2005-06-11 at 14:52 +1000, Martin Sevior wrote:
>> > > HI Vincent,
>> > >            You can include AbiWord-2.3.1 as the inaugrial package of
>> the
>> > > gnome-productivity collection in this release.
>> >
>> > When we discussed this new release set in the board meeting, there was
>> > some fear that, even without the initial proposal's references to
>> > OpenOffice, this might not be as inclusive as we like to be. I
>> > personally think that we can define it in a way that pleases
>> everybody,
>> > but we need to show that we can do that.
>> >
>> > So I think this release set should not be an official part of GNOME
>> > 2.12. But if it works outside of GNOME 2.12 (as Platform Bindings did
>> at
>> > first), without controversy, then I think we'll have shown that it can
>> > become official for 2.13/2.14, 6 months from now. I think that means
>> > just listing them on separate wiki pages and linking to them as
>> > "associated projects on the same schedule".
>> >
>> > At the very least, we need some text to define what this release set
>> is,
>> > such as we have for the existing 3 sets here:
>> >
>> > And any special guidelines, such as these for Platform Bindings:
>> >
>> Martin, is this acceptable to you, at least for 2.12?
> Martin?
> There's still no description here of what this release set would be, and
> no other proposed modules yet:
> Have you made any progress on this?

HI Murray,
          Thanks for the reminder. I'll have a round of getting buy-in on
all this.

My thoughts on the modules were, AbiWord, Gnumeric and GNOME-DB.

I'll see if anybody else is interested.

Gnumeric and GNOME_DB have told me that they were targetting September,
2005 for their next releases. (The AbiWord 2.4 release date is "within a

I suspect the ABI and API stability will be a too big an ask. From
AbiWord's perspective we're still working out how to build Word
Processors. I don't think we want to constrain ourselves to this level of
backward compatibility for a while.

I don't know whether this rules us out for inclusion in GNOME.



> --
> Murray Cumming
> murrayc murrayc com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]