What I thought was interesting about the article was how it communicated a conversation that an internal group of developers were having to a larger audience. We really need more of that and I thought Jonathan Roberts did a good job here.
Your email points out the next step we need to take - how do we direct those that have comments or suggestions to the right place? Or do we direct the internal group to the web page? And how do we continue to do this ... Stormy On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:38 PM, Seamus Malan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Hi, I came across this LWN article i.e. > http://lwn.net/Articles/304982/outlining the philosophy and plans for GNOME > 3.0. A most interesting read > indeed. While it seems like a clear majority of those who commented were in > favor of a journaled (e.g. Nemo) and activity paradigm (e.g. Mayanna), there > are a few who do not have the same zeal or stomach for it. Had me thinking. > Why can't we instead have more flexibility and have ourselves an approach > that combines the journal along with tagging and while we are at it also a > revision control system e.g. Subversion? > > Rgds, > Shaun > > -- > _______________________________________________ > Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: > Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com > > Powered by Outblaze > -- > marketing-list mailing list > marketing-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list >
-- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
