Rather than quote the whole discussion... David, I think you are right here. I personally want things to turn off when I tell them to turn off, and stay off when I tell them to stay off, but that shouldn't be conflated with a discussion of what the defaults should be.
I'd consider gnome-do popping up when I have told it not to (based on my own personal preferences) to be a simple software bug to be fixed, not a major issue that requires polemic. Again, I turn off beagle because my personal work style hasn't benefited from its indexing, but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be included. I've long argued that Foresight should measure success on tracking as close to the bleeding edge as possible without actually drawing blood, following as closely as possible its upstream best practices. For GNOME, that seems for the moment at least to be beagled and gnome-do -- and anyone who dislikes that should contribute (positively) within the GNOME community to action as well as discussion to mitigate their problems and address their concerns. For example, GNOME 3 fills me with fear due to gutting the GNOME desktop experience and replacing it with gnome-shell. That is not an opinion that should be taken into account WRT Foresight. If I want to influence GNOME's path with regard to 3D requirements and gnome-shell, I should participate in upstream GNOME. I will not argue that Foresight should stick with GNOME 2 forever. (I might choose instead to explore xfce to see whether it's just a better fit for my preferences; another reasonable options.) _______________________________________________ Foresight-devel mailing list Foresight-devel@lists.rpath.org http://lists.rpath.org/mailman/listinfo/foresight-devel
