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

Re: debian mate

Am 21.11.2012 10:30, schrieb Neil Williams:
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 04:03:33 +0100
Michael Schmitt<tcwardrobe@gmail.com>  wrote:

AFAIK is completely impossible that Debian ships MATE for Wheezy. Wheezy
has been frozen time ago and by policy no new packages are allowed in
the archive for testing during the freeze.
So much for the general rules... but exceptions ARE possible! And I just
try to make a case here about how important it might be!
The case has been denied and closed. There will be no exception for any
change anything like as large as MATE during a freeze. Adam has made
that clear, Russ has made that clear. It was already too late the day
that the freeze started. It would have taken many months of work to get
MATE into a fit state for a stable Debian release.

As part of the Debian release team it is Adam's call to make. He's
declared his decision which is fully in line with the freeze policy and
that's that. There is no point even thinking about MATE in Wheezy any
longer. It's done, closed, ended - denied. Move along now, nothing to
see here.
Please calm down. Please, don't domineer opinions of others based on such questionable arguments. I really prefer the open-minded approach here. You don't have to agree but to just say "They said no, so stop bickering" feels horribly wrong.

And about the technical content, agreed, I stopped my idea at around 3 o'clock UTC yesterday after reading Russ' mail. Based on the very well expressed concerns he had.

What bothers me is that gnome3-classic will be deprecated with the next
release of GNOME. I hope that MATE can make into Debian for Jessie.
I kind of insist it being in jessie ;)
You've already said you're not into the programming / maintainer side
of things. The way Debian works is that if someone wants something to
happen, that person does the work and/or recruits other people to do
the work. If the work isn't done by those who want the work done, it
simply won't get done. Those who do not, will not or cannot do the work
themselves are not able to insist on anything in Debian.
Don't underestimate that little smiley there... I don't really insist on anything here.

It doesn't matter how much others complain - without someone to do the
work, MATE will never get into any Debian release.

I've switched to XFCE and I may well move on to KDE4 but I will not
work on MATE in Debian. I wouldn't ever work against it but if someone
else does the work, I will require that MATE meets all the requirements
and expectations of Debian and that includes ongoing competent
maintenance within Debian, not just upstream.
You used gnome2 before, you're not happy with gnome3 either... but you have no interest in MATE? May I ask why? And even the idea to work against something like that, that does ring some very bad sounding bells...

One of my big problems with old, stale, code like MATE is that I've
always been pushing for cross-build support / bootstrapping support
across all of Debian.
No idea about the technical stuff... but to some degree, what do you expect from MATE some days / weeks / months after the fork? It just is what it is, gnome2 with another name. That means it HAS to be somewhat old. Stale not a bit as the folks work on that code, so it can't be "stale".

I know the libraries in MATE, I developed
upstream code using them, I cross-built all of them for Emdebian Crush
and some of them are truly atrocious bits of code. I was *very* glad
when libgnomeui and bonobo were deprecated, amongst others. I only wish
the migration to GNOME3 would have pleased more upstream developers
because then Debian could have dropped all the shoddy GNOME2
underpinnings. There is still a lot of good stuff which was part of the
GNOME2 environment but that's why XFCE is a good choice for most of
those who don't like GNOME3. XFCE is, largely, the good bits of GNOME2
without the horrors. It's not perfect but it is what most people who
found GNOME3 unsuitable have ended up using.
Err... bottom line MATE code may be a bit "suboptimal" because gnome2 code is? *confused*

Anyway, don't domineer others viewpoint that neither alternative will ever get "it" as gnome2 did and MATE does! I really hate that damn ignorant attitude of some! Damn it, no, Xfce is NOT a viable option for everyone!

We have what we have,

I have no desire to work on that code any more,
Then don't...

despite being upstream for several projects which used to rely upon it.
I took that code out, I did the work - I would NOT be happy to see it
coming back and contaminating my fixed code.
Then you might be glad that that will most likely not happen...

Sadly, IMHO, fixing the problems of the bits of GNOME2 which aren't
XFCE would seem to be a pointless and thankless task. I wouldn't
recommend anyone to do it.
Huh? *even more confused*

So you say Gnome2 was fine as it was, Xfce may not be as fine but it comes close, but getting Xfce to be fine as well is... useless?

Complaints do not matter one jot. Unless someone does the work, MATE
will never get into Debian, whether for Jessie or Jessie+1. There will
not be MATE in Wheezy as that boat sailed months ago.
Hooray, captain! o/

No one was complaining? It was just meant to be a discussion based on very strong arguments on both sides... which I lost. And I am fine with it.

I'm not sorry about any of this, it's the reality and I don't see that
Debian needs to apologise about it. The work was not done in time, so
the results are not available for release. End.
Oh right... please, Debian (that would mean every single contributor to that fine project) come and apologize to me! *lol*

Scrap that, let's have a drink and laugh about it? :)


Reply to: