Re: Plan to fix icons [was: Re: breakage caused by removed icons from gnome-icon-theme]
- From: Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org>
- To: desktop-devel-list gnome org, release-team gnome org, Christian Persch <chpe gnome org>, gnome-themes-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Plan to fix icons [was: Re: breakage caused by removed icons from gnome-icon-theme]
- Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 12:25:46 +1100
<quote who="Elijah Newren">
> > Dude, why are we supporting this *wholly inappropriate* late breakage? This
> > is not the kind of change that we should meekly accept at this stage of the
> > release process. We don't *have* to do this, and we *shouldn't* do it. This
> > is a choice between release discipline and riding a train wreck.
> I don't believe this is a fair representation. Rodney made the change
> mid-January, and released it in the gnome-icon-themes-2.13.5 tarball.
> He also notified desktop-devel-list, at
> Now, he did miss feature freeze by about a day, so if this is
> considered a new feature then sure it was late (though just barely).
> I had thought it was just a UI change, which he beat the deadline for
> by a few weeks.
This really goes deeper than 'feature' or 'UI' change. I would not be making
a fuss if it were that simple, without unintended side-effects, or without
creating a whole new class of bugs to deal with in just one month. This is a
major change which ought to be done at the start of a release process, with
a strategy for tackling bugs (very much like what Federico has suggested) as
they come up.
Look at the conversation about making g-i-t a 'platform API' - now how major
do you think this change is? :-)
FOSDEM 2006: Brussels, Belgium http://www.fosdem.org/2006
We're kind of like Canada, only we hate ourselves more, and it's wetter
around the edges.
] [Thread Prev