Re: GDM version used for GNOME 2.24?


I wholeheartedly agree. No-loss of functionality for users with
disabilites should be a priority over whatever step towards new exciting
technologies and features you may get. Having trouble logging in on a
system is a real problem for impaired people.

Moreover, public administrations that are evaluating GNOME in these six
months between 2.24 and 2.26 do value products also considering its a11y
support, because of existing laws (this at least is true here in Italy);
what kind of impression could you leave of a system without
accessibility support from the very beginning of a session (really, even
*before* of user session)?

Moreover, if you plan to take path A) just to get developers' attention
to GDM and be faster fixing issues, I'd say that if distros continue to
ship 2.20 because of 2.24 shortcomings, you wouldn't get much more bug
reports and fixes against 2.24 anyway.

So you'd have to ship 2.24 *and* have distro embrace it.
But I think the problem lies elsewhere, and I'd find another way to
lobby for new GDM developers; a clear call for arms would be in order
for many projects (a "GNOME love" for seasoned individuals).

Don't get me wrong: I really want to thank GDM devs. I like the
direction they're taking a lot, and I do love the new changes that are
happening. But sometime it's better to shove aside pride of getting your
hard work to the masses and be patient; "ship it only when it's ready",

An high standard means people will love it, a not-so-high one will just
have people complaining, no matter how much topping you put on the cake
you took out of the oven too early :-).

Just my 2c.

On mer, 2008-09-10 at 09:39 -0400, Willie Walker wrote:
> Hi:
> I asked this earlier, but I might have missed the response.  Have the 
> accessibility issues been resolved with the new GDM?  In particular, 
> does accessible login still work and do the keyboard/mouse/dwell 
> gestures still work to launch assistive technologies?  I know there was 
> a great plan in place (thanks Jon McCann!), but if it hasn't been 
> completed, I think this is a show stopper regression. :-(
> Will
> On Sep 10, 2008, at 8:49 AM, Vincent Untz wrote:
> > Le mercredi 03 septembre 2008, à 22:27 +0200, Andre Klapper a écrit :
> >> We'd like to have a decision made by this weekend so there's two weeks
> >> left for translators. Comments highly welcome, so you can't blame
> >> release-team only in the end. ;-)
> >
> > Thanks everybody who jumped in the discussion. From what I see, there's
> > no consensus in this thread.
> >
> > An important thing for GDM is that in most cases, really, it's the
> > distributors that decide what gets shipped and I don't know a lot of
> > people using GDM from jhbuild. So keep in mind that the message that we
> > want to send is mainly to distributors (FWIW, some already chose to 
> > stay
> > with the old GDM, and some chose to go with the new one).
> >
> > I don't see us ignoring a good bunch of the comments (there are good
> > points on each side), so there are two ways to go forward:
> >
> >  + use GDM 2.24, and mention that it is not ready for all uses (listing
> >    the use cases where it needs work would help), and that GDM 2.20 is
> >    still available and working.
> >
> >  + stay with GDM 2.20, and mention that we have a new GDM coming soon.
> >
> > We kind of did solution b for 2.22, but it turned out not a lot of
> > people stepped up to fix the remaining issues in the new GDM. It could
> > be because the community was not aware of all this, though.
> >
> > Right now, I'm leaning towards solution a (assuming the new GDM works
> > fine and there's no major non-regression bugs). I'm not happy with
> > regressions (I'd say this is a good example to keep in mind when
> > reworking a module -- do not ignore the old feature set or clearly
> > explain why your remove some features), but I would think that without
> > sending a clear message, people will still stay with GDM 2.20 in 2.26,
> > and so on.
> >
> > I'm also a bit lost when it comes to fast-user-switch-applet: it only
> > works with the old GDM, AFAIK. I think the new GDM provides such an
> > applet too. What's the plan?
> >
> > Vincent
> >
> > -- 
> > Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
> > _______________________________________________
> > desktop-devel-list mailing list
> > desktop-devel-list gnome org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

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