On 20 Jan 2012, at 17:21, Sebastien Bacher <[email protected]> wrote:
> Le 20/01/2012 17:50, Bastien Nocera a écrit : >> In about 40 minutes, I created a binary RPM[1] that contains the 3 >> services we care about in GNOME from the systemd Fedora package. I >> believe you do something similar. > Thanks, that works but is not really optiomal (i.e that could easily lead to > a non well maintained,half broken systemd in Ubuntu because it has been > packaged by people who care only about the services and not about the other > features from systemd). > > But anyway from a distributor perspective this specific problem is orthogonal > to the discussion: > - the issue is not Debian,Ubuntu specific They're the only ones really complaining though... The others took it upon themselves to do the integration work. Only Fedora, Debian/Ubuntu and SUSE were supported. SUSE haven't complained either. > - the issue is not that distributors have work to do to integrate GNOME > - nobody asked you to solve integration issues for downstreams > > What as a downstream we would like is early communication from the project on > what platform requirements will be added so we have time to do our work and > deliver a good GNOME experience to our GNOME users. You're missing the fact that you (personally) received emails about that feature by virtue of being subscribed to gnome-control-center bugs. Consider this a, if rather late, notice that we'll use the systemd timedated API in GNOME 3.4. I believe enough work-arounds have been given for the downstreams for which it's a problem. But at the end of the day, planning is pretty complicated when I'm the only person reviewing project-wide patches in g-c-c. So you get the notice at the same time as others, myself included: when I merge the patch. Cheers _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
