On 8/1/06, Vincent Untz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would waiting for the 2.18 release cycle be an issue for desbkar?
I don't think that there's any issues, but we'll discuss this on deskbar-applet-list. If we do punt to 2.18, will we just rebadge the latest 2.14 as 2.16.0? Leave d-a 2.14 as 2.14, but as part of 2.16? And should we backport as little as possible [1] from HEAD? [1] Well, apart from unbreak-the-build things like the patch to play nice with evolution-data-server 2.16. On 8/2/06, Shaun McCance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > With an automated listy-clicky thing, you don't get to see > explicit files, and you have no way of checking against a > checksum or a digital signature. Yeah, an example: suppose there's a hypothetical intended-for-use-for-five-years distro that shipped this listy-clicky thing (without some means of verification). One day, years down the track, some user goes through the GUI, and picks up the master list from http://raphael.slinckx.net/deskbar/repository/deskbar-repository.xml [1], which links to http://some.web.site/my-awesome-deskbar-extension.tar.bz2. This code looked good at the time it was added to the master list, but in the mean time, the domain registration for some.web.site expired and a villian has picked it up, and now serves up evil spyware versions of the extension to our poor user. Bad. [1] Really, if NewStuffManager is to be part of GNOME, a stable version of NewStuffManager should only point to a master list hosted somewhere under gnome.org, I reckon. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
