Re: Gnome 2 summary 27/06/2002
Le Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 04:50:44PM -0400, Colin Walters écrivait:
> You also appear to have uploaded the GNOME 2 version of gnome-terminal
> to unstable. What's up with that? I really don't think we should
> replace GNOME 1 in unstable yet. At least not until we have a solid,
> concrete transition plan.
>
> Most importantly, we have to consider upgrades from woody. jdub said
> that upstream doesn't have any plan yet for transitioning user settings,
> and I think we should at least attempt to do this.
>
> Going with jdub's suggestion, I say that we keep GNOME 1 in unstable
> until around GNOME 2.0.1 or so. Also, I suggest that we wait until
> other GNU/Linux distributors write said user settings transition
> scripts, and then we blatantly steal them. :)
Upstream are strange then ... they're giving away software that will
break everybody's configuration and then plan to fix that for 2.0.1
when everyone will have switched ?
If that's not the case, then I don't see why you want to wait for 2.0.1.
As for user settings transition scripts, I wonder if we ever had such
beast in the past ...
Anyway unstable users should expect to have problems like that, it's not
a reason to keep Gnome 2 out.
And a last remark, I feel that it's better to not introduce any "*2"
packages in unstable ... in experimental it's ok, since it's an add-on
for tests ... in unstable, it's the main tree, no need to keep the
choice.
Just my 2¢ of course.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog -+- http://strasbourg.linuxfr.org/~raphael/
Formation Linux et logiciel libre : http://www.logidee.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: