Lots of reasonable points made on this thread. The two cents I'd like to throw in are: $0.01: we shouldn't feel like shipping unsugarized apps is a failure: better an working app w/ crappy UI than no working app at all! $0.02: my suggestion to "replace" Browse wasn't to eliminate the sugar-specific UI work, simply to suggest that we could more profitably base it on Firefox than Gecko. Similarly, minimizing the differences between upstream Abiword and write is (IMO) a Good Thing. We should keep our forks as small as possible, so that we can most effectively use the work being done upstream.
For Firefox, that means (for example) that we can use upstreams Awesome Bar instead of reimplementing our own url completion. For abiword, it means acknowledging that a lot of our initial Tubes port was/is simply unnecessary now that we have a stream-based collaboration mechanism, and we can/should be able to strip down Write as a consequence. It's possible that we can most fully utilize Abiword/GTK's theme mechanism to make Sugar UI "upstreamable" as well. Again, the point is to reduce our diffs with upstream. --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
