On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 11:59 -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote: > On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 13:32 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 19:05 -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote: > > > > > > While I don't see this being included with the next GNOME 2.12 release > > > many people have been asking for these features and I think it is time > > > we consider fixing up the gnome-session patch to make it conditionally > > > compilable and get people playing with it. I think the lead time needed > > > to fix up all the issues is not that long and distros can start to > > > include at least the wrapper part in the near future and then eventually > > > get it proposed for 2.14. > > > > > how would we include the wrapper program without having the > > gnome-session part of it for 2.12? > > If you can get the patch ready and people are willing to accept it then > be my guest but I don't think it is going to be ready for 2.12 (either > part). I think you underestimate the work needed to get a proper > implementation going. > what is missing then in libgnomeservice/gnome-session? I'm not saying it's perfect, but that as a simple autostart system, with all the testing we can get if we have it in HEAD, it should work, at least the same way current gnome-session works, without having all the services hard coded.
> This does not stop distros from shipping it and > as I said, not sure about your guys schedule but I think at least with > respect Fedora, that will give us enough lead time to include it. 2.12 > freeze is coming up soon isn't it? > next week AFAIK > > > > > > Anything else? > > > > > from all my tests, this is, IMO, ready to be tested for 2.12. So, I > > would suggest we add the gnome-session conditionally compiled code (once > > I finish it), make that the default so that we force people to test it, > > and if big errors are found, come back to the old gnome-session thing by > > default. > > If you believe so and the maintainers believe so than go ahead but I > rather stay cautious at this stage of the game. > yes, me too, that's why I think the 2 months of testing we can have before 2.12 is enough to either find big errors (and thus come back to the old code) or just ship it with 2.12. > I don't think there is > any harm leaving it off for a release giving us more time to polish it > off. > no, of course, no harm, although as I said, it's ready for testing and for simple service autostarting tasks. I'm using it myself for a few days now, with no real problems. -- Rodrigo Moya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
