Re: new module: eggcups

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

On Sat, 2004-07-17 at 13:22, Chipzz wrote:
> It doesn't have to be about the user. In debian, for example, the cups
> maintainer is a seperate maintainer from the gnome maintainers. I can
> very well understand that he would not want to integrate d-bus in cups.
> 
> Or it just be that the user is not running linux at all. There are a lot
> of people using *BSD. This doesn't pose a problem in se wrt the cups in-
> tegration, but where is udev on *BSD and GNU/Hurd?

If *BSD or Hurd have a printing subsystem that isn't tracking new
improvements, then printing on those systems won't have new
improvements. Not the end of the world.

But there's nothing in the architecture to keep them from supporting
these new features. The architecture with D-BUS, HAL, etc. is definitely
designed to be portable. HAL was specifically introduced to avoid using
the Linux kernel directly.

Which would make it pretty funny if we refused to include HAL in GNOME
on the grounds that non-Linux people will refuse to install it. In fact
GNOME has traditionally had a bunch of Linux-specific stuff such as the
battery applet that can be eliminated with HAL and friends.

> It troubles me a bit that gnome is going in a Linux/i386 direction, and
> maybe even the RedHat/Novell direction, instead of a *NIX desktop direc-
> tion.

GNOME itself is neutral. The issue here is that each OS has to be
extended to support features. For example, you would not expect that
GNOME has USB support on an OS kernel without USB support.

This is not GNOME's problem and does not indicate that GNOME is biased
toward kernels with USB support. It just indicates that GNOME takes
advantage of USB support when USB support is available.

It's not GNOME's job to hack on the kernel or other system components of
every OS in the world. It's our job to use the available features on as
many OS's as people are willing to actively port GNOME to.

Havoc