On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:14 AM, Florian Müllner <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:09 PM, Marco Scannadinari > <[email protected]> wrote: >> In fact, I think that these sorts of subtle >> design-based decisions should be held in something like loomio (see >> recent loomio post in desktop-devel), to be later implemented if the >> response is positive. > > And as has been mentioned on that thread, this is "design by > committee", which is not how it works (or should work). Yes, sometimes > controversial changes are reversed at a later point, and a user vote > would almost certainly have prevented the controversial change in the > first place, but it would also prevent those controversial changes > that turned out right - in particular, neither GNOME 2 nor GNOME 3 > would have happened in the first place. > > >> I think your suggestion of a "feature" branch can be a worthy compromise, >> though. > > Except that Bastien is right - while on a branch, a feature will > hardly be tested by anyone than other core developers of the same > module. It's unfortunate, but "real" users generally only get to test > a new feature once it appears in their distro (read: some time after > the feature appears in a stable GNOME release).
Another option is to use the extension system for that. But I am not sure that will get us a lot more testers either without active promotion. So yeah I agree the only way to get real users to test it is to merge it. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
