Hiya, On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 07:50:04PM +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote: > Hey, > > That's a "classic", we usually review our plans for GNOME for the > next cycle. > > That's going to be a controversial topic but I want to suggest we > stay on stable GNOME this cycle […]
Ah, I think this is quite an interesting topic for us indeed. We don't seem to be getting any closer to GNOME, as indicated by the surprises you've pointed to. I wonder if we can fix/reduce that problem in future? Given the way that both projects are now design led, and the fact that it's design decisions / philosophies that are driving many of these difficulties, it would seem prudent for the respective design teams to try to work together a bit more closely. I wonder if we can facilitate something here, either at UDS depending on the people there or elsewhere. Also, will we have enough upstream guys at UDS to have a GNOME relationship healthcheck like we had before? Back to the initial proposal quoted above. My initial reaction was that I disliked it because my philosophy that I generally prefer to work as close to upstreams as possible so that we can have a more productive feedback loop when it comes to bugs and features. But it seems that perhaps this is slightly broken for us, so neither party is getting much benefit out of it. A benefit would be that tracking stable series lets us work more closely with our other big upstream, Debian. We might be able to reduce our deltas there quite a lot if we're tracking the same stuff. Cheers, -- Iain Lane [ [email protected] ] Debian Developer [ [email protected] ] Ubuntu Developer [ [email protected] ]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- ubuntu-desktop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop
