On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 15:36 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
quote who=Dan Winship
But it seems to me now that everyone other than me (and possibly Jono) is
actually talking about Xgl, and I have no comment on that.
(OTOH, if you really were saying that Novell's writing a replacement for
the
quote who=Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller
I was not talking exclusively about Novell, Xgl, or the new panel
applet. I was talking about a serious problem in our community, and the
destructive ideas, memes and role models that support it.
Isn't what we got here exactly what has been
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 11:01 +0100, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller
wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 15:36 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
quote who=Dan Winship
But it seems to me now that everyone other than me (and possibly Jono) is
actually talking about Xgl, and I have no comment on that.
Hi,
Evandro Fernandes Giovanini said:
I think the process used by Novell is very common in the GNOME community
(and Free Software in general).
Compare contrast with Spatial nautilus and the GTK+ file selector.
It's also funny that you should pick Metacity - Havoc wrote a document
on his
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 12:57 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote:
This course of action will create a time when GNOME goes the way of
propriortary UNIX: Tru64, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, IRIX... imagine a
world with Novell Desktop, Topaz, Java Desktop, the Hatrack Environment:
all competing products...
Jeff said (after 'Sorry State') ...
..
I put it in emotive terms because *someone* has to offset all the hugging
and back-slapping about Dan's mail. All this positivity about a mail that
basically says this community shit is too hard! fuck it!, and just puts
that meme right back in centre
Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 12:57 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote:
This course of action will create a time when GNOME goes the way of
propriortary UNIX: Tru64, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, IRIX... imagine a
world with Novell Desktop, Topaz, Java Desktop, the Hatrack Environment:
all competing
I put it in emotive terms because *someone* has to offset all the
hugging
and back-slapping about Dan's mail. All this positivity about a
mail that
basically says this community shit is too hard! fuck it!, and
just puts
that meme right back in centre square. Nat and Miguel blogging
about
quote who=Thom Holwerda
What I am missing in your replies is some sort of thank you to Novell.
They seem to have done some serious amount of work -- behind closed
doors, but they did it. They released their code for everyone to benefit
from. So what is the big problem?
So, again, despite
Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 11:01 +0100, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller
wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 15:36 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
quote who=Dan Winship
But it seems to me now that everyone other than me (and possibly Jono) is
actually talking about Xgl, and
quote who=Thom Holwerda
But my point remains. How far are you willing to go? Must developers
adhere to some sort of code of conduct-- a sort of extra set of
requirements-- before they can contribute to the GNOME project?
Because that is kind of how your viewpoint comes across here.
I don't
It isn't about Design by community but Design IN the community. The
former assumes everyone has something useful to say, the latter merely
recognizes the value of code review, security checking, third party
input that -may- be valuable, and possibly getting help.
If you design stuff in secret
On Mer, 2006-02-08 at 12:07 +0100, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
This course of action will create a time when GNOME goes the way of
propriortary UNIX: Tru64, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, IRIX... imagine a
world with Novell Desktop, Topaz, Java Desktop, the Hatrack Environment:
all competing products...
quote who=Alan Cox
It isn't about Design by community but Design IN the community.
*Exactly* - and it's so easy to fall to laziness in the face of all the
challenges Dan so eloquently explained in his email... and that's what has
been happening in GNOME for a long time now. Let's break
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 19:51 +0800, James Henstridge wrote:
Isn't what we got here exactly what has been asked for? That 'big'
changes to GNOME needs to come from 'outside' projects? Havoc for
instance was advocating that in his blog entries. So if people are
unhappy about XYZ in GNOME, for
ons, 08,.02.2006 kl. 23.20 +1100, skrev Jeff Waugh:
quote who=Alan Cox
It isn't about Design by community but Design IN the community.
*Exactly* - and it's so easy to fall to laziness in the face of all the
challenges Dan so eloquently explained in his email... and that's what has
been
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 11:09 +, Jamie McCracken wrote:
Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 12:57 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote:
This course of action will create a time when GNOME goes the way of
propriortary UNIX: Tru64, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, IRIX... imagine a
world with Novell
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 14:20 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
I know some very wise people have decided, apparently without much
discussion with the community, that GNOME would switch to Subversion.
But I keep thinking that, although Subversion is much better than CVS,
maybe we would
Hi,
I know some very wise people have decided, apparently without much
discussion with the community, that GNOME would switch to Subversion.
But I keep thinking that, although Subversion is much better than CVS,
maybe we would benefit more from a distributed version control system,
like
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 02:20:15PM +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
perhaps but the real question is why isn't this a branch in CVS? Why is
there a need for clandestine development?
Maybe because CVS branches are inherently complicated. And maybe
because you have to ask
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 15:10 +, Ross Burton wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 14:20 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
I know some very wise people have decided, apparently without much
discussion with the community, that GNOME would switch to Subversion.
But I keep thinking that,
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 23:57 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote:
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 02:20:15PM +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
perhaps but the real question is why isn't this a branch in CVS? Why is
there a need for clandestine development?
Maybe because CVS branches are
quote who=John Williams
I take Jeff's point as well, although personally I would not have put it
in such emotive terms.
I put it in emotive terms because *someone* has to offset all the hugging
and back-slapping about Dan's mail. All this positivity about a mail that
basically says this
I put it in emotive terms because *someone* has to offset all the
hugging and back-slapping about Dan's mail.
Er. Yeah well.
Anyway, I just reread Jono's original message and corresponding blog post
again, and it still seems to me that he was talking solely about the GNOME-
UI-related stuff in
quote who=Dan Winship
But it seems to me now that everyone other than me (and possibly Jono) is
actually talking about Xgl, and I have no comment on that.
(OTOH, if you really were saying that Novell's writing a replacement for
the panel menu was commons-sapping, community-tearing, morally
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 12:53:52PM +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
quote who=John Williams
I take Jeff's point as well, although personally I would not have put it
in such emotive terms.
I put it in emotive terms because *someone* has to offset all the hugging
and back-slapping about Dan's
26 matches
Mail list logo
