> The metaphore mismatch in two points - the users of GNOME have the power > to fork it (I heard even calls to fork GNOME before 3.0) so if > sufficient number of developers decides to maintain GNOME 2 it may still > live (probably under different name - IANAL and I'm not sure about > trademark etc. details). (Whether the discontent have necessary skills > is of course different matter). > > GNOME is also only a part of stack and I don't think GNOME 2 will stop > working with, say, kernel 3.6 which would include new drivers etc. the > same goes for sane/cups/mesa/... hence it will unlikely have issues with > new HW. I am talking about users, not developers. For the users my point remains, my metaphor is valid. Users do not fork, do not develop. They do not upgrade parts of the stack - they upgrade distros. Have you heard the opinions like "I will stay with existing version of Debian as long as I can - since it runs 2.32, then will switch to XFCE?" I did.
Sergey _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list