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

Re: Gnome 2 transition



On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 03:52:50PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Le Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 03:20:49AM -0700, Chris Waters écrivait:
> > > Even though upstream have released Gnome 2.0 to the wide public, some
> > > uystream people still think that Gnome 2 is not yet ready to be imposed to
> > > our unstable users.

> > Gnome2 is ready for users.  Everyone agrees that Gnome2 should go to
> > unstable.  The question is whether it's ready to <em>replace</em>
> > Gnome1, or whether Gnome1 should be maintained in parallel until a

> When I say "impose", it's because Gnome2 would replace Gnome1.4 thus
> leaving no choice to unstable users. Otherwise nothing would be "imposed".

Ah, ok, I read it as "some people think that providing Gnome2 (at all)
would be an imposition, because it's not ready."

> It was not a misstatement.

Fair enough -- then consider my post to be a clarification, rather
than a correction.

> > smoother upgrade path is available.  Debian has a reputation for
> > providing smooth upgrades, and simply removing Gnome1 at this point in
> > time does not seem to meet our usual standards.

> Of course, Gnome1 is kept in testing in any case ...

Keeping Gnome2 out of testing by means of an artificially inflated bug
report -- this bending of the rules merely serves to emphasize (at
least to me) that the Right Thing is not being done here.

Of course, in your defense, Gnome is large enough to possibly justify
bending some of the rules.  But when the decision to bend the rules
becomes this controversial, it may be time to rethink the decision.

> > Maybe if we keep dithering and arguing long enough, Christian will
> > finish the update scripts, and the whole thing will become moot.  :)

> I'd like it to be that way, but I'm afraid people will always be able
> to be unsatisfied in a way or in another with Gnome 2

We can short-circuit that problem by agreeing now on what the terms
are for dropping Gnome1.  Certainly, my objections will melt like the
spring snow if there is at least a reasonable attempt at a
Debian-quality upgrade path available.

I think the history of Debian speaks for itself -- we make a quality
distribution by doing the Right Thing, even if it is sometimes
controversial (note, for example, that X4.2 is still not in unstable).

cheers
-- 
Chris Waters           |  Pneumonoultra-        osis is too long
xtifr@debian.org       |  microscopicsilico-    to fit into a single
or xtifr@speakeasy.net |  volcaniconi-          standalone haiku



Reply to: