On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 20:36 +0200, Javier Jardón wrote: > Hello, > > in your application you say: > > > - (Re-)defining GNOME: > > The Foundation charter defines GNOME as a loose collection of > > independent project, though we need to stop considering it as such if > > GNOME is to take an important role in the future of computing, be it on > > the desktop, or in devices, where it would provide the infrastructure. > > Could you elaborate a bit more about this?
Look at the upper and lower bounds on this diagram for GNOME Mobile: http://www.gnome.org/mobile/gmae-arch-diag.png Where does GNOME start and stop? Do we go from the kernel up? From the user-space bits up? Is something still GNOME when it doesn't use GTK+? When it doesn't use Matchbox (as per the diagram), or metacity/mutter? I would think it being fine to say, GNOME is: - Linux kernel - D-Bus - NetworkManager/BlueZ/PolicyKit/udisks/upower - X11 all the way to GTK+/Clutter combination and apps And this is what we need to focus on. There's a lot of swamp-draining to be done in the lower levels, and working on GNOME means working on one of those things in the stack. In the same way, I think it doesn't shut out other OSes, be they other free Unices, or even Mac OS X and Windows, where the stack is just shifted (pretty much everything underneath what we currently consider the GNOME stack). Defining the GNOME OS is required if we want to avoid getting cornered working on the bits at the top of the stack, and working around problems, rather than solving the solutions "The Right Way" all the way down our stack. Obviously, this would require discussions... Cheers _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
