Re: Bug#154950: Thoughts on GNOME 2 transition
- To: Raul Miller <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#154950: Thoughts on GNOME 2 transition
- From: Raphael Hertzog <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 10:37:50 +0200
- Message-id: <20020905083750.GA27968@home.ouaza.com>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- References: <20020828000907.GB29183@hadesian.demon.co.uk> <20020828080928.GB10150@home.ouaza.com> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <20020831073517.GA8330@azure.humbug.org.au> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20020901195919.GA5610@finlandia.infodrom.north.de> <20020905005417.GA23766@azure.humbug.org.au> <email@example.com>
Le Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 10:51:31PM -0400, Raul Miller écrivait:
> We're waiting for Jeff Waugh (the Gnome Release coordinator -- not a
> debian developer, but a participant in the chat) to write up a cleaned
> up version of solution 2 (from earlier in this bug's thread).
I've read the irc logs (christian sent them to me) (I could not attend
because my adsl line was down).
My summary is :
- everyone agrees to keep Gnome1 libraries as long as necessary
- everyone agrees that Gnome2 should replace Gnome1 (the question is
when and how) with no change in the package name...
(the only name change with the "2" appended was always meant as a
temporary measure the time for Gnome2 to mature, however Jeff Waugh
realised that it would be better to not change the name but to keep
the packages outside of unstable to avoid the conflict)
(everyone beeing everyone except Ian Jackson who spoke about having
Gnome1 and 2 co-installable and who doesn't see any problem with keeping
the "2" extension to the packages)
The only real question is : do we prepare Gnome2 in unstable, in
experimental or in a separate staging area.
With the following advantages/disadvantages :
* Pro :
* Autobuilt on all arches
* Wider exposure with more testing
* Cons :
* Gnome2 has some limitations beeing worked on but which may annoy
some unstable users
* Gnome1 desktop would only be kept in testing, we'd have no Gnome1
desktop in unstable.
Experimental/staging area :
* Doesn't annoy happy Gnome1.4/unstable users
* Gnome1.4 would stay in unstable until Gnome2 is
* Not autobuilt
* Not widely tested
You must also take those considerations into account :
- Gnome1 is mostly dead upstream
- Gnome2 is usable (but needs some manual reconfiguration because the
configuration system changed)
- Gnome1 apps will continue to work under Gnome2
- most Gnome1 apps are currently being ported to Gnome2
> As I understand it, the idea is put gnome 2 in experimental, for now,
> and develop gnome with an eye towards releasing sarge with the gnome 2
> desktop and gnome 1 applications and platform.
Well, Gnome2 would be the default desktop. So applications which are
ported to GTK2/G2D should use this version as the default. But of course,
old applications where the port has not (yet) been made would be kept
anyway (with Gnome1 libs).
Raphaël Hertzog -+- http://www.ouaza.com
Formation Linux et logiciel libre : http://www.logidee.com