On 04/11/2011 06:26 AM, Martin Owens wrote: > On Mon, 2011-04-11 at 04:22 -0700, Scott Ritchie wrote: >> I think it's the height of arrogance for us to tell a user that we're >> going to deliberately break his application because it wasn't updated >> to >> use our new indicator library. > > We tell users all the time that we've broken their windows application > by not implementing any windows apis. No guarantees. >
The difference here is their application worked on a previous version of Ubuntu. Regressions for current users are worse than other kinds of problems. > So, do we guarantee completely that gnome 2.x apps will function in > Unity? If we do, then we should support the entire API (somehow), > otherwise we be honest and say we support a major subset which may mean > your app won't work completely. > > It can hardly be arrogance so long as we're honest about what we > support. > > Martin Owens > There's a difference between supporting something and not intentionally breaking it. -- ubuntu-desktop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop
