Re: Vino: proposal for inclusion in GNOME 2.8

On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 09:21 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
> >From my reading of your own description, most of the cool, tie-in-with-
> other-bits stuff (gdm, for example) would be in the 2.10 timeframe. 

"Integration with GNOME" is more than "cool tie-in-with-other-bits
stuff".  While vino may not be as integrated as it could be, there are
still things like integrating with our control center, using our HIG,
etc, that are interesting and useful.  "as integrated with GNOME as it
can potentially be" is not a good criteria for inclusion with GNOME -
"reasonably integrated with GNOME" is.

> I
> mean, we don't even have a VNC viewer- how is this different from
> proposing, say, a jabber server with a gtk configuration tool? 

I think that's fairly obvious, really.  Jabber servers are not a
per-desktop server (and if a per-desktop jabber daemon is useful for the
desktop, then I don't see why it shouldn't be included).

> Or hell,
> X+redhat-config-xfree86? 

The reasons why we don't include X are pretty obvious too, and don't
apply to vino.  We have discussed including gnome-system-tools, which
are "just gtk configuration tools".

> Both of those things are useful servers, sure,
> but it's not clear why they would belong in gnome, other than 'useful,
> and has a gtk interface at some point.'

It isn't clear why jabber belongs in gnome, but that doesn't give any
insight into why vino doesn't belong in gnome.  Vino provides a useful,
commonly-used (on windows), commonly asked-for feature that is perfectly
aligned with our focus on manageability.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]