Quim Gil wrote: >Do we want to have an official list of GNOME applications maintained by >their respective developers in the next version of gnome.org? > >Currently we are leaving this (key) task to gnomefiles.org, although >this website is no making distinction between official and unnofficial >GNOME software. Apparently GNOME has other concerns but we are not >offering any alternatve ourselves. > >I was reading Ross Burton's blog entry about "Why I Don't Use >GnomeFiles"? >http://www.burtonini.com/blog//computers/gnomefiles-2006-02-13-12-40 > >Having a look at the planned structure for the revamped wgo at >http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWeb#head-414ca48c4650bea820c5caabf3a9c7bac9fc7878 >there is a "Products" page under the "About" section: > >- Products (a sane list of the main projects, seperated into >Applications, Desktop, and Libraries.) > >and no mention to GNOME applications under the Download section. > >although under Community there is a > >|- Get more apps > -> gnomefiles.org > >Shouldn't we give more relevance to the official GNOME applications? > > If you want a way to aggregate information about various apps, it might be worth considering the DOAP project description format: http://usefulinc.com/doap
Then it would be a matter of collecting references to those files, and occasionally pinging them to find the current version, web page, download URL, etc. James. _______________________________________________ gnome-web-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-web-list
