Hi Allan! >> Yes. *I* was annoyed by the recent Deja Dup discussion, and felt that >> the developer got short-changed at the end of the day. I was very >> annoyed at the "systemd as external dependency" discussion, and the >> message that some people following along the "GNOME OS" meme sent to >> developers on other platforms. > > There seems to be some confusion here. Frankly, I have no idea what the > design team has to do with either the Deja Dup or systemd discussions. I > only ever received positive comments about having GNOME Backup from our > designers. As for GNOME OS, though members of our designers are involved > in some related work (all in the open: see [1]), I wouldn't say that the > team is a driving force behind that initiative (though I'm pretty sure > they all think it's a good idea). > > It feels like our design team is being blamed for every controversial > decision or discussion here. It might come as a shock to some, but we're > generally just busy designing UI. :)
Actually yes, it would be a bit unfair to blame the design-team (or only the design-team) here. But at least from what I remember from the discussion about Deja-Dup it was not a pleasant experience for somebody wanting to integrate with GNOME. The points I remember: * GNOME designers decide how that feature should look - not you as a maintainer * You need to give up your brand "Deja Dup" if you want to be part of GNOME * Deja-Dup isn't allowed to exist in parallel as a application (+ a lot of technical stuff about control-center and external capplets) I am pretty sure that things were not entirely meant that way but if you read the discussion on d-d-l the impression stays pretty much. I guess Dave used the systemd discussion as a example for a possible bad attitude in GNOME but it is clearly unrelated from design things. Regards, Johannes _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list