Bug#467324: include gnash in desktop?
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 05:17:42PM +0100, Alexander Sack wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 05:48:47PM +0200, Eddy Petrișor wrote:
> > On 26/02/2008, Alexander Sack <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > Yes, but face the truth: unfortunately, neither debian nor linux in
> > > total have enough market power (read: userbase) to make much of a
> > > difference yet. We are getting closer to that point, but that doesn't
> > > mean that its wise to start the battle right away.
> > >
> > > So for the time being, its looks far better to put the work into
> > > something that provides users with a superior user experience; for
> > > instance, superior by choice (like what the plugin finder improvement
> > > would do); grow the user base and once we are mature enough to have
> > > real power, throw in our weight to finally free the world.
> > I agree with Alexander. Even if gnash was more stable, having a tool t
> > switch/enable the plugin you want is a lot more desirable than loosing
> > the battle before it begins.
> Thanks, even more so if you consider that we have swfdec-mozilla which
> still didn't loose the free-flash battle. Actually, swfdec does quite
> well (and even works better for some use-cases), so ignoring their
> work wouldn't be fair either.
So, why don't we do the same for every component in the desktop task? Or even,
why don't we add a GNOME/KDE/Xfce choice template in the default install?
Does our average newbie (I'm talking about the one that isn't familiar with
manual package selection) have enough information to make this kind of
If you want to discuss whether swfdec is more appropiate than gnash as the
default option, then please do that, based on its own merit, like we do for
<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)