Re: Gnome 2 summary 27/06/2002
On Thu, 2002-06-27 at 19:16, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> 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 agree with this in principle. However, I'm not convinced it's going to
happen in practice. I personally have no plans on creating *2 packages.
I think a limited *2 policy should be implemented: in addition to the
libraries and such where it's required, the base GNOME libs - i.e., the
ones whose functionality cannot be done without for a user's desktop to
be considered "GNOME" (like the panel, and nautilus, and such) - in
particular those which are interdependent at runtime (and I'm not sure
of the extent of these dependencies) - should use the *2 postfix for the
first while. Simple applications, which are not materially different
from the previous version and/or have clear benefit to a new version
which few users will complain about should just go straight to the GNOME
2 version.
--
Joe Drew <hoserhead@woot.net> <drew@debian.org>
Please encrypt email sent to me.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: