On 9/11/06, Havoc Pennington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maxim Udushlivy wrote:
I remember somebody compared Gnome with a car. But the desktop is an
environment, so it is not a car, it is a parking. The same goes about a
hammer: desktop environment is a collection of tools. Different tasks
BJörn Lindqvist wrote:
I think you are 100% right and that it is important for GNOME to
narrow its focus. For example, if GNOME limited its focus to computers
with 256 MB of RAM, then...
I was proposing to narrow Gnome by ideology (implementation style),
Havok - by desktop tasks
So clearly we need to choose a number relatively prime to 12 if this is
desirable. With 9 months there's only 4 possible months for release.
If you did, say, 7 months, then you'd never repeat a month until you'd
hit 'em all :-)
-Rob
On Fri, 2006-09-08 at 10:43 -0400, Pat Suwalski wrote:
Elijah
Maxim Udushlivy wrote:
BJörn Lindqvist wrote:
I think you are 100% right and that it is important for GNOME to
narrow its focus. For example, if GNOME limited its focus to computers
with 256 MB of RAM, then...
I was proposing to narrow Gnome by ideology (implementation style),
Havok - by
On 9/11/06, Maxim Udushlivy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was once lurking around planet.gnome.org and there was an interesting
accident. One guy said about Israel that it is evil and another (Jeff
Waugh?) was trying to moderate him.
I blogged about the Israel issue and Jeff did not try to
Gnome Sheriff must be elected by some formal procedure (better by
democratic voting). His main responsibility - moderate mailing lists
from bullshit, destroy crazy ideas before they infect people, protect
project ideology, etc.
A democracy arises because allowing everyone a say in running
On 9/12/06, Ed Mack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A democracy arises because allowing everyone a say in running the
country is not feasible. We already have structures where everybody can
voice opinion, and if you think you can do something better you are free
to patch/fork anyone elses code (as a
Shaun McCance wrote:
On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 00:33 +0400, Maxim Udushlivy wrote:
Havoc Pennington wrote:
I think the best shot at this would be to gather a small group that
agrees on some audience they want to try and do stuff for, and just
start doing it; I'm not sure how the
Zaheer Merali wrote:
On 9/11/06, Maxim Udushlivy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was once lurking around planet.gnome.org and there was an interesting
accident. One guy said about Israel that it is evil and another (Jeff
Waugh?) was trying to moderate him.
I blogged about the Israel issue and
Ed Mack wrote:
Gnome Sheriff must be elected by some formal procedure (better by
democratic voting). His main responsibility - moderate mailing lists
from bullshit, destroy crazy ideas before they infect people, protect
project ideology, etc.
A democracy arises because allowing
Travis Watkins wrote:
On 9/12/06, Ed Mack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A democracy arises because allowing everyone a say in running the
country is not feasible. We already have structures where everybody can
voice opinion, and if you think you can do something better you are free
to
Hi,
Travis Reitter wrote:
1. Pick a short list of major concepts to put into Topaz.
We don't need perfect consensus at this stage, but it'd be nice to start
forming some agreement. Concepts (superfeatures across the
platform/desktop) would be along the lines of People as a first-class
Hi!
On Mon, 2006-09-11 at 02:02 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
Hi,
Travis Reitter wrote:
1. Pick a short list of major concepts to put into Topaz.
We don't need perfect consensus at this stage, but it'd be nice to start
forming some agreement. Concepts (superfeatures across the
Maxim Udushlivy wrote:
I remember somebody compared Gnome with a car. But the desktop is an
environment, so it is not a car, it is a parking. The same goes about a
hammer: desktop environment is a collection of tools. Different tasks
require different collections. The items that you
Havoc Pennington wrote:
Maxim Udushlivy wrote:
I remember somebody compared Gnome with a car. But the desktop is an
environment, so it is not a car, it is a parking. The same goes about
a hammer: desktop environment is a collection of tools. Different
tasks require different collections.
Travis:
One thing I'd like to remind people is that typically when a product
bumps the major version number, this involves some evolution in the
underlying interfaces. I know some of these sorts of issues are being
addressed by Project Ridley (e.g. GtkPrint), but it would probably be
good to
On Tue, 2006-09-12 at 00:33 +0400, Maxim Udushlivy wrote:
Havoc Pennington wrote:
I think the best shot at this would be to gather a small group that
agrees on some audience they want to try and do stuff for, and just
start doing it; I'm not sure how the overall GNOME boat can be turned
This kicked off a few ideas for me:
Topaz basically seems to be so massive a change that some extremely
enthusiastic people are flinging high-level concepts at the wiki
(without developing them - I'm responsible for one of these [which I've
since removed]), while others (who seem to tend to be
On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 13:56 -0400, Pat Suwalski wrote:
Hubert Figuiere wrote:
I would like to suggest at one point to try to break with the 6 month
release
schedule of Gnome to do a major release with a certain number of feature
that would involve possible infrastructure changes in the
2006/9/8, Rodrigo Moya [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 19:51 +0100, Jamie McCracken wrote:
Hubert Figuiere wrote:
Hi,
I would like to suggest at one point to try to break with the 6 month
release
schedule of Gnome to do a major release with a certain number of feature
Le jeudi 07 septembre 2006, à 19:32, Don Scorgie a écrit :
Hi,
On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 11:24 -0700, David Trowbridge wrote:
What in particular isn't possible with the 6-month cycle?
For one thing: the documentation gets squeezed. We (the doc team) have,
basically, 3 month to document all
Hi Andrew,
Quoting Andrew Cowie [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
We regularly have people showing up who are asking us questions about
gtk 2.6 and using a version that is *FOUR* cycles old. We can't support
that as we've long since moved on from there (shit, the people who wrote
that code aren't even
On Fri, 2006-09-08 at 14:44 +1000, Andrew Cowie wrote:
The people I work with on java-gnome won't be able to hack on GNOME 2.16
specific bindings until we have GNOME 2.16 desktops on our systems. My
systems are otherwise production (in the sense that I use them to do
business so I can't
On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 12:59 -0400, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
I would like to suggest at one point to try to break with the 6 month release
schedule of Gnome to do a major release with a certain number of feature
that would involve possible infrastructure changes in the platform.
Not sure
On Fri, 2006-09-08 at 10:17 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 13:56 -0400, Pat Suwalski wrote:
Hubert Figuiere wrote:
I would like to suggest at one point to try to break with the 6 month
release
schedule of Gnome to do a major release with a certain number of
Hi,
I would like to suggest at one point to try to break with the 6 month release
schedule of Gnome to do a major release with a certain number of feature
that would involve possible infrastructure changes in the platform.
There have been a large pimping of project Topaz, and I strongly
What in particular isn't possible with the 6-month cycle?
-David
On 9/7/06, Pat Suwalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hubert Figuiere wrote:
I would like to suggest at one point to try to break with the 6 month
release
schedule of Gnome to do a major release with a certain number of feature
Hi,
On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 12:59 -0400, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
There have been a large pimping of project Topaz, and I strongly believe that
this is the kind of goal that would need a longer development cycle for a big
leap forward towards world domination.
The counterargument here is always
David Trowbridge wrote:
What in particular isn't possible with the 6-month cycle?
Nothing's impossible, but a longer cycle every so often would encourage
larger and better thought-out changes. I always get the feeling that
GNOME contributors hold back on a lot of excellent ideas because they
Hubert Figuiere wrote:
I would like to suggest at one point to try to break with the 6 month release
schedule of Gnome to do a major release with a certain number of feature
that would involve possible infrastructure changes in the platform.
I have been thinking about this as well, just
Hubert Figuiere wrote:
Hi,
I would like to suggest at one point to try to break with the 6 month release
schedule of Gnome to do a major release with a certain number of feature
that would involve possible infrastructure changes in the platform.
There have been a large pimping of
Hi,
On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 11:24 -0700, David Trowbridge wrote:
What in particular isn't possible with the 6-month cycle?
For one thing: the documentation gets squeezed. We (the doc team) have,
basically, 3 month to document all the changes, update all the docs and
add any new documentation
tor, 07 09 2006 kl. 11:24 -0700, skrev David Trowbridge:
What in particular isn't possible with the 6-month cycle?
I honestly don't think it's about the cycle length as much as the slight
fear we seem to have of setting major goals for the project.
I doubt we can do Topaz within the comfort of
On 9/7/06, Pat Suwalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Trowbridge wrote:
What in particular isn't possible with the 6-month cycle?
Nothing's impossible, but a longer cycle every so often would encourage
larger and better thought-out changes. I always get the feeling that
GNOME contributors
Elijah Newren wrote:
[1] I've often worked on big changes that couldn't possibly make it in
by the next release, including during code freezes. Sure, I can't
commit it to HEAD when I'm doing so, but I can keep working on it even
during hard code freeze (in branches, of course), planning it
editor at http://www.osnews.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:desktop-devel-list-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Nielsen
Sent: donderdag 7 september 2006 21:22
To: desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: getting on a longer release cycled
tor, 07 09
On 9/7/06, Havoc Pennington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, there's a reality that HEAD has to always be roughly working since
lots of people are trying to work with it.
Given that reality, a longer cycle essentially does nothing to make it
easier to make large changes, because a branch is
Hi,
Hubert Figuiere wrote:
I would like to suggest at one point to try to break with the 6 month release
schedule of Gnome to do a major release with a certain number of feature
that would involve possible infrastructure changes in the platform.
More important than moving away from the
An innocent bystander who I'm going to flame now wrote:
I doubt we can do Topaz within the comfort of our tried and true 6 month
cycle and we do need to decide what Topaz is going to be at some point.
But how can you say that we can't do Topaz in the 6 month cycle when you
admit that WE DON'T
On 9/7/06, Pat Suwalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nothing's impossible, but a longer cycle every so often would encourage
larger and better thought-out changes.
Or lots more not-so-well-thought-out changes...
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
Hi all,
I think the focus in this thread is a little imbalanced. I think we
really, really need to focus on actually decided on what Topaz is
going to be. I feel that the lack of direction in the project to say
this is what will be in Topaz is actually starting to harm us - it
is making us look
On Thursday 07 September 2006 14:51, Jamie McCracken wrote:
I dont know how topaz will transpire but I feel it should be written in
a native high level language like D or Vala as its likely to be a
rewrite of much of the existing code and could be doable in 9 months
with a more productive
On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 13:23 -0600, Elijah Newren wrote:
Not sure if I'll paraphrase him correctly,
You came close enough that I shan't quibble :)
++
This is what I've experienced in language binding land (and probably the
story I told Elijah that he's paraphrasing):
The people I work with on
43 matches
Mail list logo
