Re: CD1 without a network mirror isn't sufficient to install a full desktop environment
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 03:21:06PM +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote:
> GNOME is seeking people to develop the GNOME-Panel - if MATE
> developers want a classical desktop environment based on modern
> technologies, they should develop the GNOME-Panel instead of forking
> unmaintained and outdated technology like Bonobo or GConf.
I'm so tired of these gnome2 vs gnome3 discussions...
One of the primary freedoms in free software is the freedom to fork. If
you want to tell people they shouldn't fork, you have no business being
a free software developer.
If the gnome people would prefer that there was no fork of gnome2, then
they should not have thrown it out. But they did, so it's their own
Also, "forking unmaintained software" is a contradiction. If you're
forking it, then by definition you'll be maintaining it.
> I don't consider MATE to be future-proof.
And that's your good right, but that really doesn't mean anything.
> If you don't like the GNOME-Shell, using GNOME3-Panel or Xfce instead
> is a much better choice.
Unfortunately, you're not in a position to decide anything about
anyone's preference, except where it concerns your own.
Fact is, gnome2 is now abandoned by the gnome developers, and there are
many people who consider that a bad idea. These people have decided to
continue the development of gnome2. AIUI, one of their stated goals is
to port gnome2 (the interface) onto gnome3 (the APIs), so that the two
can live side-by-side. This should not bring harm to gnome3 -- on the
Now, if you don't like that, nobody's forcing you to use mate. If you
think they're silly and backwards in continuing to develop what some
other people have decided is outdated, you're free to ignore them. But
please do not attempt to tell people what they should spend their own
free time on. You won't be successful.
The volume of a pizza of thickness a and radius z can be described by
the following formula:
pi zz a