Re: is GNOME the future default desktop?
Montreal Thu Feb 25 09:32:36 1999
Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 1999 at 08:45:01PM -0500, Navindra Umanee wrote:
> > > wait until the KDE/Qt licensing problems are fixed before doing anything
> > > about it.
> >
> > By the way, GNOME and KDE are not the only desktop projects. For
> > example, another one is GNUStep.
>
> GNUStep isn't actually useful for anything except developers who like doing
> NextStep type hackery. there are no apps or anything that uses it.
Have you tried Window Maker recently? Did you know that GNUStep alpha
was recently released? For that matter, isn't GNOME still alpha,
unstable, and only for developers who want 3 or 4 copies of GTK+ lying
around?
The point is that Debian should not be one to judge here. If Debian
is one to judge, then go ahead, make an official decision and
announcement.
> > > it's not important.
> >
> > It may not be important to you but the main reason I sent the original
> > email is that the statement in question was actually being used
> > as fuel against KDE.
>
> tough. their license is a (currently) a problem and KDE will not be an
> official part of debian until their licensing problems are fixed.
<snip, shuffle>
> when they fix their license problems is when we should change our public
> stance. not before.
Sorry, I'm not talking about the Qt license nor Debian's public
stance on KDE.
> > Afterall, why bother fixing KDE problems to Debian's satisfaction if
> > KDE's fate has already been decided?
>
> one could as well ask "why bother fixing the license when nobody is
> complaining about it?"
Debian has _not_ decided the fate of KDE, any statement or implication
to the contrary is false.
> fortunately, it looks likely to be fixed soon.
>
> craig
>
> PS: i repeat: it's not important.
Important enough to have raised your hackles, apparently.
-N.
Reply to: