Re: Gnome 2 summary 27/06/2002
<quote who="Steve M. Robbins">
> I thought that a new GNOME 1.4.x just came out and is still supported
> upstream, no?
Hrm, did 1.4.1 actually come out? I think that was a pre-release. Anyway,
yes, we still have a few people supporting it and handling bugs and stuff.
> Am I misinterpreting this quote from Jeff Waugh?
> You're probably best off maintaining both, at least until a)
> 2.0.2ish and/or b) Ximian / Red Hat release their 2.0-based
> desktops.
Yeah, still 100% behind this. I love GNOME 2, but there are some issues with
moving to it, and only it, immediately:
- There are a few users who are still precious about their crackrock
settings, and are uncomfortable with the improved usability and
administrability of G2D. (Yes, this is an attempt at humour.)
- Little work was done to provide integration with and migration from 1.x
desktops. This is a big issue for GNOME users on Debian. Red Hat and
Ximian will almost certainly be putting work into this as they prepare
to shift their users across. It would be great if some Debian
maintainers got involved in this process.
So, I strongly agree with the earlier discussion that involved conflicting
package-name2 packages sitting alongside their package-name GNOME 1.x
friends in unstable. Later on, when the integration/migration issues have
been resolved, the packages can be renamed. I don't believe that pinning
packages is a workable solution (I've never pinned a package, and I don't
believe I should be required to do so, unless Debian suddenly adopted a
"let's be a complete pigsty and not an integrated, sensible distribution"
policy, which would shock and amaze me).
I recommend a transition period in any case.
Thanks,
- Jeff
--
Lego is the plural of Lego.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: