On Thu, 16 May 2013 11:03:00 -0300 Jim Diamond <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 18:51 (+0200), Víctor M. Jáquez L. wrote: > > > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 06:32:27PM +0200, Genghis Khan wrote: > >> Hello, > > >> On Wed, 15 May 2013 14:07:45 +0200 > >> Víctor M. Jáquez L. <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 01:55:45PM +0200, Damien Sandras wrote: > >>> > Bad news. > >>> > > >>> > That probably means GNOME has now less or no interest in Ekiga > >>> > anymore. > > >>> Yes, though, it is a fact that we are not keeping the pace of > >>> gnome, with it's library dependencies and user interface design. > > >> What exactly is missing or wrong in Ekiga? > > > There's nothing missing or wrong in Ekiga per se. > > > But if we want to think in Ekiga as a component of GNOME (3.x) we > > shall admit that Ekiga doesn't follow the UI design and the > > migration to GTK+ 3.x, GSettings, GStreamer, etc., is a bit lagged > > behind. > > Speaking as a voice on the side... why do we/you/... want ekiga to be > a gnome component? Why not a generic program which is independent of > any desktop environment? I dislike GNOME because of its dependency management which is troubling for users who would like to install a program that weight less than 10MB and need to get over 90MB of unneeded programs to get that program to work. For your information, MATE (fork of GNOME2) are working to solve this dependency travesty of GNOME http://mate-desktop.org/ > (I'm not bad-mouthing gnome 2 or gnome 3; I do prefer gnome 2 to kde. > However, as a non-gnome desktop environment user (Slackware dropped > gnome many years ago), the "gnome" aspects of (first gnomemeeting and > then) ekiga have caused me considerable amounts of grief over the > years. In particular, gconfd has caused lots of problems, and it is > unclear to me what the benefits are, in particular for people who > don't use gnome as their DE.) Before I get to bash GNOME, please note that you can choose not to use GNOME and gconfd support by using these flags: --disable-gnome \ --disable-gconf \ So your argument is irrelevant (well, unless there is no GNOME-free binary package available in some repository) even though I fully agree with your point of view. I have two main problems with gconfd. One problem is focusing on GNOME instead of finding a way to incorporate a solution to GNOME, LXDE, MATE, Xfce and even KDE and Qt all together; The other problem is that, once again, GNOME are attempting to foist on others, who are not interested, unneeded dependencies, which is a way to market the brand GNOME. The politics of GNOME is bad and I am still amazed and wonder how it got to such an ugly point instead of better helping to all of us who like to be or to have an ability to be DE independent and who, so I think, are still a minority. > As an(other?) example, I am having no luck when behind a NAT router. > I see no gui option to set up STUN. I search the web a bit and find > out I need to use gconf-editor. Too bad that it doesn't exist on > slackware, since (presumably) there is no gnome. Ho hum. I also think that there should be an option in GUI to set up STUN. > Jim > _______________________________________________ > ekiga-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/ekiga-list -- Proper English www.reddit.com/r/proper 4 teh lulz... http://email.is-not-s.ms _______________________________________________ ekiga-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/ekiga-list
