Re: expanding the Linux System definition with OIN

[Frederic Peters <fpeters gnome org>]

Hi Karen,

> I asked him for guidance so that we weren't nominating packages that
> were too far afield and he said: these should be pretty conservative and
> either kernel related and threaded thereto
> 
> The packages currently included, with their version numbers, are here:
> http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/pat_linuxdefpop_table1_2.php
> 
> and here:
> http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/pat_linuxdefpop_table3.php
> 
> Do any of you have any suggestions? I'd ordinarily love to coordinate with
> KDE and others, but with such a tight turn around, we'll have to try that
> next time...

I looked at those tables and the second one (compiled as of May 2012)
lists pretty much all of GNOME modules, in their 3.2 versions. If
we're supposed to be conservative and decide to stay at 3.2, we should
simply ask for the inclusion of missing modules (because it looks like
version numbers were updated, but at its basis it's still mostly
modules that composed GNOME 2, e.g. gnome-shell is missing).

Do you think this makes sense? In that case it would be easy to
provide a table with module name, version number, download URL.


        Fred