Re: libnotify, notification-daemon and gnome desktop modules



On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 06:10:10PM -0500, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 15:55 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > It seems there was fairly good consensus to include libnotify &
> > notification-daemon in the gnome desktop release.  Looks like you've
> > done some awesome work.  :)  However, there's a couple issues:
> > 
> >   - I just barely noticed that notification-daemon depends on libsexy,
> > which was not proposed; should libsexy just be pulled in as a
> > dependency?  It doesn't have many dependencies itself so this would
> > probably be okay...

It's being used by more and more programs. xchat-gnome is a good
example. It should be okay as a dependency (though I'm biased ;).

> Pulling in as a dependency sounds fine if nobody objects.  Alternatively
> if Christian doesn't mind it could be treated like egg and be put into
> the tree.

I wouldn't prefer that. I've tried this already for a couple of
projects and have had bad results. e.g., forks of libsexy code,
patches not getting back to me.. I realize that would be slightly
different in this case, but I would much rather continue to depend on
libsexy.

> >   - Lack of use of Gnome resources.  This was pointed out at
> > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-January/msg00274.html,
> > though Olav pointed out that freedesktop bugzilla was being used. 
> > There was http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2005-December/msg00148.html
> > about moving the repositories to Gnome CVS, but it appeared that it
> > never happened.  And, perhaps most importantly, no tarballs have been
> > uploaded to Gnome ftp (i.e. install-module'd) meaning that we don't
> > really have the infrastructure to count it as included.

I could work with you guys on the tarballs issue, but I don't plan to
change hosting of code or bugs. I'll explain below.

> Freedesktop is most likely the best place for it since it in theory is
> supposed to be used by KDE also.  Personally I think the spec should
> remain in Freedesktop but the implementation should be in GNOME.  It is
> already heavily GNOME centric in terms of linking to GTK.  The protocol
> itself is so simple that it would be easy enough for KDE to write a
> daemon and library that suites their needs.  Unfortunately from what I
> have seen KDE is going their own way on this anyway.  It just seems we
> would get more traction if it were on the GNOME servers but I understand
> that doing so could permanently turn off other communities.  It is up to
> Christian on that one but if not Gnome it certainly needs to sit on the
> fd.o CVS servers eventually.

I've never truly understood the mentality that code must exist at a
certain place to be usable. As long as it's easy to get to and work
with, it shouldn't be a problem. This is something that should matter
most to the maintainer, as the maintainer has to work with the code,
rather than users or packagers who are getting software from many
places anyway.

I have weighed the pros and cons of moving code to fd.o, to gnome cvs,
etc. and have decided that for the forseeable future, it'll probably
stay where it is. Here's a fairly long list of reasons why:

1) This is not a GNOME project. I love seeing GNOME apps use it, but
   it's not a GNOME project, and never was.

2) I have full control of the server it's on. I make daily backups. I
   can ensure the software I need is on there. And, more importantly, I
   can ensure that the people who need commit access can have it ASAP.
   I have had mixed results with this on both GNOME CVS and
   Freedesktop.org.

3) I like the bug tracker I'm using far more than Bugzilla. It's
   working out well for me. Moving to GNOME CVS or Freedesktop.org would
   likely mean giving this up.

4) SVN treats me well. While I could get this from Freedesktop.org, I
   can't from GNOME CVS.

5) I once had this project on freedesktop.org. Maintenance was more
   painful than I had liked, and at one point I lost almost everything
   due to a server crash. It was way too hard to even get things back up
   and running after this, due to people being busy restoring other
   projects, or having personal lives. I'd much prefer the stability of
   the server being on my hands.

6) This is not the only project hosted outside of GNOME. Those other
   projects survive well enough.

7) Freedesktop.org is a more neutral place than GNOME, and I want to
   make sure this stays neutral. There should definitely be a copy of
   the spec there, but I see no reason for the code to stay there.
   Anyone can get it off my SVN servers easily enough. It's easier for
   me to maintain it this way.

8) I want to make sure changes go through me. I cannot guarantee this
   when people I don't even know have commit access to my project,
   even if there are policies in place.


I know that there are counter-arguments to most of these, and I know
that there's a strong push to move this into GNOME CVS. My opinions in
this matter are unpopular, but things are set up how I like them now,
and I know they wouldn't be set up this way if the project moved. At
some point in the future, I may reconsider this, but not until GNOME
moves to use Subversion (if that ever does happen).

Now, I do plan to create a dedicated site or wiki for the notification
project, and link to the downloads and subversion repository there.
For now, that's all available at http://www.galago-project.org.

So, all that being said, I would like to work with you guys on the
tarballs and to simplify everyone's lives. But that includes mine :)

Christian
 
-- 
Christian Hammond         <>  The Galago Project
chipx86 chipx86 com       <>  http://www.galago-project.org
   "We anticipate a global world-market with place for perhaps five computers."
      -- Tom Watson, IBM 1949

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature



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