Re: new modules for 2.12

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

Luis, I can't see any reason to delay this. It just makes life difficult
for translators. Please send the email.

On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 22:34 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 15:54 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
> > [If everyone could review and make sure I'm not misrepresenting the
> > views of the group, I'd appreciate it. this is particularly true of
> > the office suite section.]
> > 
> > The release team met today, and we talked a bit about new modules.
> > Some conclusions were even reached. :)
> > 
> > In:
> > * evince: It's clearly a great, very gnome-y app. We'd like to thank
> > the ggv and gpdf authors for all the work they've done over the years
> > * services-admin: is now fairly polished and the maintainer wants it
> > in, and no one has objected to that.
> > * gnome-keyring-manager: underwent a lot of work after the last round
> > of objections, and has not been objected to in its new format.
> > release-team is a little worried that the maintainer has
> 
> whatever the end of this sentence should be, it's simpler just to
> mention that there haven't been quite as many releases as we'd like.
> 
> > Out:
> > * eggcups: there is still some edginess about including such a partial
> > solution. We'd encourage it to get integrated with gnomeprint and
> > gnome-cups-manager (as much as is possible) and have One Printing
> > Solution going forward, instead of much discussion about disabling
> > this or enabling that and maybe or maybe not having it all overlap.
> 
> I'd prefer to say:
> 
> There was some concern about overlap with the notification functionality
> in gnome-cups-manager, while still also requiring gnome-cups-manager for
> printer configuration. There was also concern about the need to patch
> cups and uncertainty about how distros feel about this. Though the
> community seems to generally support eggcups in GNOME, there hasn't been
> enough time to explore the issues properly for 2.12. We hope that
> distros will have made this clearer by 2.13/2.14.
> 
> > * office suite. There is still a lot of confusion about what this
> > would mean for GNOME- if we have a 'GNOME office suite', does it mean
> > the GNOME QA team has blessed the office suite? What does it mean for
> > our relationship with open office? I could go on in this vein for
> > quite some time :) We still encourage the office team to do a release
> > together and on a regular schedule, because we think that's good juju
> > for any group :) and because we think that going ahead and Doing It
> > might resolve some questions. But without more consensus as to what
> > this would mean for the impacted teams and the release process, it's
> > hard to say it is the right thing right now. We should start probably
> > set up a small group (perhaps the release-team + the abi and gnumeric
> > folks) and/or start discussing it in Real Life (at the Summit) and
> > move forward from there to see where the future takes us.
> 
> You don't need this. We just need to say that there hasn't been much
> activity around this proposed release set so it doesn't look like
> anything significant will happen with it for 2.12. Anyway, it's not even
> a real proposed GNOME release set - it's a "release set on the same
> schedule", and at the moment it's Martin's job to manage it. I wouldn't
> even mention it with the new modules decision.
>  
-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com