On Tuesday 24 May 2005 07:27, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Mon, 23 May 2005, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > I just feel it wrong of us to constrain the
> > CDD framework to whatever we feel is sane: Someone might consider it
> > relevant to do a "gnome" CDD, with everything pure GNOME and explicitly
> > avoiding "pollution" from different suites. And similar with GNUstep or
> > KDE...
>
> This are not really CDDs from my point of view: It is the task of the
> packagers of these environments to build a reasonable environment. If
> you look at
making sure a group of desktop-environment has a good setup is something
else entirely from making sure the software (with upstream setup) is
packaged correctly.
One's usability, the other is packaging, two areas that require very
different sets of skills.
There's notting saying the kde/gnome-team shouldn't get involved/spend a lot
of time with that, but I definately don't see it as a given either.
I can easily see a KDE-CDD being created with the aim of creating one or
more good default setups aimed at different use-cases (developer,
office-worker, home-user, ...)
In fact there seem to be several derived distro's whose main value is just
that.
--
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB)
2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double
format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam)
Attachment:
pgpsP182j_Hvi.pgp
Description: PGP signature