Hi,
Murray Cumming wrote: > The "desktop" includes stuff that everything (apart from very tightly > focused embedded stuff) needs. Vendors who don't need some part of the > desktop usually don't want any part of it. So, it's just a "base" that > isn't yet a development platform. You're saying this as if it's a given, which I don't think is the case. If it's an attempt to define the term, and get consensus around that definition, then I suggest "core" or "base/basic environment". > As for bringing in new functionality and allowing varied focus, I still > think this could be done with additional release sets such as > - Productivity: > Spreadsheets, Word processing, Slides, Databases, Publishing. > - Creativity: > Photos, Graphics, Drawing, Video- and Audio-editing, sharing, mixing, > augmenting, collaborating. This has now been proposed a few times (by Darren Kenny first, I think), so let's have a go at defining it. We'll need (imho) a proposal for an initial module set for: * Platform I assume everyone is happy with the platform we have now? * Bindings So far, GTK# in the bindings seems pretty uncontroversial * Bare bones Do we take the current core module list, or should we strip it down to move, say, Vino to a sysadmin bundle with Pessulus and Sabayon? It would be helpful to have a full and complete list of all the applications which are currently part of the core desktop. It would also help to have some idea how to handle panel add-ons (ideally, the core would be C only, and deskbar would move elsewhere) * GNOME life (we need a different name) Rhythmbox, Totem, Soundjuicer, FSpot, Serpentine, Pitivi/Diva/both, Thoggen, Ekiga, more? * GNOME admin Sabayon, Pessulus, Vino, gconf2-editor * GNOME graphics (don flameproof pants) Inkscape, the GIMP, others? * GNOME developer Glade, Gazpacho, MonoDeveloper, Eclipse (am I off my rocker?) Profiling stuff (Frysk, gprof, ...?) * GNOME Office Abiword, Gnumeric, Glom, OpenOffice.org, Planner, Dia, ... * GNOME Connected (yeuch - someone else really needs to take on naming these things) xchat-gnome, gaim, gnome-blog, gossip/liferea/straw, ... There's lots of duplicate functionality in there, and perhaps lots of missing stuff too, this is intended just as a sketch of the kinds of things we could do with the big tent approach of a small core and vibrant release sets. We're getting all of these applications into GNOME, and distributors would choose release sets (and even parts of release sets) which interested them. But GNOME itself would be a fully functional environment. A nice job for some young whippersnapper would be to come up with a first draft of a proposal for release sets and functional guidelines for inclusion of an app into a release set, and we can see what happens. > In reality, however, all end users and vendors will want everything. But > the vendors will just prioritise on some of these parts. That suits me fine. Currently, that happens anyway, but the GNOME project isn't giving any signpost to people about what we consider solid, useful, well supported, etc. And it nicely addresses the issue of people who want the bare bones. Cheers, Dave. -- David Neary [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list