Hi Calum, Calum Benson p??e v ?t 15. 10. 2009 v 13:22 +0100: > On 15 Oct 2009, at 12:43, dick hoogendijk wrote: > > > On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:28:04 +0100 > > Ghee Teo <Ghee.Teo at Sun.COM> wrote: > > > >> So I don't think not including evolution on LiveCD is that bad. > > > > I think it's bad that all of a sudden a mail reader that IS included > > is > > dropped in favour of another. On what basis? Who's to tell? The users? > > Or just some prefs of the developers? I think evolution has to stay, > > as > > thunderbird has. > > Much as I prefer Evolution over Thunderbird myself, most people who > are already using Evolution on OpenSolaris today are likely to be > upgrading to 2009.03 rather than doing a clean install, so they won't > notice it going away. And first-timers who are doing a clean install > will probably never know that it used to be there. > > So really, this change would only affect a small percentage of users, > and these days it's pretty trivial to pull down Evolution from the > repos anyway. (We certainly wouldn't be the only GNOME distro that > only shipped Thunderbird on the install CD, either.) >
I think this was not about TB vs. Evolution on LiveCD so much, but about TB as "default" mail client and what impact will have it on quality of Evolution in Solaris. In Solaris 10 times there were and are Evolution and Mozilla mailer (originally from suite, now TB) on the same level, for some time Evolution as prefered (e.g. Sun WCAP was there much earlier), only TB was forced as updated in comparison to Evolution. Now I hear TB is default. Why did your team decide to prefer enviroment-non-integrated mailer? And yes, by putting TB as the only mail client on LiveCD you are making decision for many new non-technical people which mail client they will start to use and will have experience with. So why TB and not Evolution :-) Maybe I missed some technical/usability discussion about it but it seems I am not alone who missed it. Best regards, Milan
