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

Re: Christian Marillat, once again

On Sun, 2002-07-21 at 14:55, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Also, there are a metric bazillion Gnome 1 utilities in the world,
> including in Debian.  Is there a solid commitment that sarge will have
> ONLY gnome 2 packages?  That *every* gnome 1 packages will be
> upgraded--EVEN IF the upstream maintainer has not done so?

Nope, that's not possible. :) I think the general consensus is that the
core desktop is GNOME 2, and everything should be upgraded to the new
versions (as is always the case in Debian) - which are likely going to
be based on the GNOME 2 platform.
> Debian frequently does *NOT* operate this way, when there are major
> changes to the user interfaces.  For example, major releases of GNU
> Emacs always get new package names.  Even minor releases of the kernel
> get new package names.  Major guile releases, perl releases, etc., all
> get new packages for JUST THIS REASON.

However, you can also look at KDE, which operates this way. (i.e., no
multiple versions.)

> It would have been *so bloody easy* to do it right:
>   Release the gnome 2 packages with new names.
>   Once the upgrade path is fixed, release packages under the old
>   names, if the upgrade path is really as seamless as you claim it
>   will be.
> It's very sad that nobody bothered to do that approach.

Actually, that was originally the plan, but the second step seems to
have been pre-empted.

Except that's not entirely true. The majority of GNOME 2 hasn't been
released to unstable - it's mostly in experimental with the "2" postfix.
There's no reason why the packages which can really break things - like
the panel, nautilus, etc - will be released to unstable without the "2"
prefix in the beginning, and transitioned afterwards. Christian released
gnome-terminal 2.0.0 into unstable because it was supposed to not break
anything and be superior. This is obviously not the case, but it does
provide better exposure to brand-new software and therefore results in
better software in the end. I will probably follow this example with
gedit as well, because there's not much of a reason to release a gedit2

Joe Drew <hoserhead@woot.net> <drew@debian.org>

"This particular group of cats is mostly self-herding." -- Bdale Garbee

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: