On Wed, 2002-07-31 at 14:52, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 03:01:30PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > [Christian] wrote 3 conversion scripts for gnome-terminal, gnome-session and > > gnome-panel. > > > > The "problem" above should've specified that. AIUI, everyone believes > > > Gnome2 will be ready for sarge and sid at the point when an upgrade from > > > 1.4 to 2.0 preserves most of the configs of all the users on the machine. > > There's no evidence that this may automatically happen one day. > > Of course it won't happen "automatically". It'll happen precisely when people > get out there and write the upgrade scripts. > > Now, personally, I'd've thought the Gnome2 hackers should've written > those scripts before they released Gnome2. But they didn't, and if they > don't care about our users, well, that's our job anyway. There're two > possibilities: we either say the same thing that Gnome upstream did, ie > "Your configuration settings aren't considered important. If you liked > 'em, recreate 'em. It's all too much effort for us." and put Gnome2 into > unstable as is, or we say "Gnome upstream are completely incompetent and > should never have released Gnome2 yet. Unlike them, we're not incompetent, > and we're going to spend some time doing the work those lazy sonsabitkas > should've done, and make sure your upgrades are as smooth as they can be."
Stop saying BS like that. The upstream has never *ever* said that "configuration settings aren't important". Jeff has telling people that ever since G2D was effectively released. We were hoping that distributors of Gnome2 (mainly Ximian, Redhat and Mandrake actually) would help us out with that. If we didn't release G2D and push for it in in the distros, the resources wouldn't have been allocated for this work to be done, and G2D would have taken even longer to arrive. And I certainly don't appreciate the people that put so much work into making Gnome2 or myself being called "lazy sonsabitkas". Say that on IRC while I'm looking away, but recording it in the BTS is the icing. > If we want to do the former, then we replace Gnome1.4 in unstable, > and let Gnome2 roll into testing in the usual fashion. > > If the latter's considered better -- which it certainly seems to be to me, > although I gave up on Gnome configuration ages ago -- then people need to > setup somewhere that they can *write* such scripts, and work out a way of > delivering them. This can happen after everyone with unstable installed > has lost all their settings, but that'd be something of a waste, at least
