Re: very rough pre-gep tentative new modules list

[Michael Meeks <michael ximian com>]

Hi Luis,

On Tue, 2002-09-17 at 14:08, Luis Villa wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-09-17 at 08:38, Michael Meeks wrote:
> > 	So; if I get the terminology right - we're adding these apps to the
> > point where we get to support them as much as nautilus yes ? - or at
> > least group them together with things like the control-center, panel,
> > nautilus ?
> 
> Yes, that's roughly the plan

	Specifics aside; I think the root cause of my acute unease about adding
anything to this list, is understanding precisely the rational for
adding more things.

	Why do we want to add more things to the core desktop ? is it:

	a) To make the authors feel good 
	b) To mandate a minimum 'Gnome Desktop'
	c) To encourage people to hack on them
	d) So we can claim 'Gnome has feature XYZ'

	? any others ? my concerns are that:

	a) Not a good reason to include anything

	b) A good idea - but if this is the case, we're foisting a 	   massive
burden on companies in terms of long term support - a
	   can't just pop stuff in and out. Package addition should be a
	   very well thought out process.

	c) Pushing unstable stuff in to get people to work on it seems 
	   like an extremely daft strategy.

	d) We can claim that Gnome has a feature XYZ anyway

	Perhaps I missed something.

	So really my question hinges on "What is the 'Gnome desktop'"
deliniation useful for ? how is it different to 5th toe ?

	And of course, from that flows "should we be pushing random stuff into
it temporarily instead of agreeing a long term strategy ?".

	So ...

	Ultimately I think the distinctions inside the Gnome platform should be
useful - not there to be ignored by distributors. That there is worth in
having a "minimum Gnome desktop" - BUT: the more useful the distinction
is, the more crucial that we don't go randomly shoving stuff in and out
of it on a 6 month timescale.

> Well, I was trying to do that some weeks ago; it got derailed with 
> talk of a gep, whose purpose I still don't understand, and which it
> curently appears will not be written until after I leave for Africa
> tomorrow.

	The purpose of the GEP is to make the decision making process public,
and open to comment from all. Even if you don't happen to like the
comments ;-)

	Regards,

		Michael.
	
-- 
 mmeeks gnu org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot