On 7/27/07, Kristian Høgsberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 7/27/07, dragoran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 7/27/07, Matthias Clasen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Given that test1 is around the corner, I thought it might be a good > idea > > > to give a little status update on the features that the desktop team > has > > > been working on for F8: > > > > what happend to compiz-fusion? > > I've been punting this issue for a while; sorry about that, I should > have been more involed in the debate there. I have two concerns about > the proposed updates: > > 1) I'd rather not ship a git snap shot for fedora 8. If we know that > there's a stable release on the horizon, that is, coming out withing > the next 1 or 2 months, we can do an update, but if there's no > expectation that a stable release is coming out in time for fedora 8, > I'd rather wait. The concern here is mainly that we're starting to > ship externally packaged plugins for compiz and we need an upstream > maintenence branch (0.6) that maintains a stable plugin API. I don't > know what the compiz schedule is for the current development branch > but it still sees plugin API breaking changes at this time. As far as > I know, there's hasn't been a stable release since the merge, but if > most of the API changes to allow beryl plugins to run have been > merged, maybe it would be a good idea to wind down and release 0.6?
I asked about this a while ago and David wanted to release a 0.5.2 and a 0.6.0 a bit later... what happend to this? David? 2) I don't know what the current status is on config plugins. I know > there is interest in getting ccp configured as the default backend, > but I don't know what the benefits of that is over gconf. I > understand that gconf is GNOME specific, but I was thinking that the > better approach was to move gconf and gtk-window-decorator to a new > compiz-gnome subpackage. What is the compiz upstream position? My > position is that we need to use the native configuration system of the > desktop environment (that is, gconf when running under GNOME) and > reinventing new config file formats is almost never the right approach > (no matter how fun it is). ccp has a gconf and a konf backend so we can just use this. the benefit over gconf are the configuration tools that already exist for it. there was a thread on fedora-devel-list about this...
_______________________________________________ compiz mailing list compiz@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/compiz