> Yes, GNOME should be an OS. Yes, GNOME should define the final user > experience. Oh really? Someone stated quite recently that we aim for "external competition", right? If we define the final user experience, if we build full OS - what's left to distros? What kind of external competition can we talk about? How can Redhat compete with SUSE if both of them use GNOME that defines _final_ user experience? Are distros hanging around in order just to build rpms/debs and change background images?
I think the idea that GNOME is the final-final product is unrealistically selfish. The _final_ experience is defined by distros (or even worse, by computer vendors, preinstalling and customizing those distros). And by making visible boundaries in GUI ("this is GNOME" - "this is not GNOME") we are making a bad favor to distros, in terms of the user experience. Or enforce them to fork and to patch, heavily. Which is not a good favor either. I guess the questions like that will be discussed again and again. The interaction between GNOME and distros is a very complex matter. On political level, on user experience level, on technical level. Please please please - put together the policy document. Even if its content would make me and Luca unhappy - at least that would be some document people could read, could refer to (may be, it would even make me shut up:). At least I could send unhappy minority to read that document when they WTF me (that happens a lot on linux.org.ru AKA "Russian Slashdot"). Then they would decide if they want to stick with GNOME or just move on - that might save d-d-l one day from the invasion of all those unhappy heads. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list