Le mar 26/08/2003 à 09:12, Sven Luther a écrit : > Well, i don't think so, And it is ironic, don't you fing, that the > epiphany people are now adding all the features the fork was about back > then, like mouse gestures and so on. But they are adding it in a way they feel more consistent with the HIG, using plugins the newbie user will not even consider. More fundamentally, they didn't made the same errors as with Galeon: they implemented the essential before the loads of extra features. > Also, it is because of the aims and choices that so many people where > very unhappy about galeon 1.3 featurelessness. And epiphany doesn't even > has the personal toolbar stuff, which is sort of going backward. What toolbar stuff are you talking about? The toolbar is customizable, and the bookmark bar is way easier to use than Galeon's, with just a checkbox to include a bookmark in it. > Not to forget that the lead epiphany developer is targeting, not your > average debian user, but his grandmother who is not computer literate. > This may be all well for gnome and its new corporate market target, but > it is wrong for debian to make such statement, and has already alienated > a big part of the galeon userbase. So you feel Debian should not target your grandmother? I thought this kind of feelings was less widespread in Debian developers than in OpenBSD's. Anyway, I don't see anything wrong with Debian shipping Epiphany by default with the Gnome desktop, especially when nothing at all prevents you from installing another browser. > Disclaimer : notice that the same can be said for most of gnome, but you > get used to it some, and there are other tools, but i bet that most > people which mades such critics about gnome2 where primarily concerned > about the galeon 1.3 state. I think the major error the core Gnome developers made was to launch a new desktop without realizing it would take so long to port applications to GTK2. A large project like Galeon cannot be ported in 5 minutes. > Normal, they hijacked the galeon developer base, no ? Were developers forced to work on Epiphany? > Supporting epiphany over galeon, and the whole fork was an error, and > now we are paying for it. Looking at the two projects now, with Galeon sinking in more and more beta releases, getting slower each time, and Epiphany being close to a releasable state, makes me think it was a good choice. > Removing galeon from debian/sarge would be an > error too, and i hope it does not happen. This is true, nothing justifies removing Galeon from sarge/sid. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\ : :' : josselin.mouette@ens-lyon.org `. `' joss@debian.org `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=