Re: Rygel/gupnp-dlna missing in new modulesets

["Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeenix gmail com>]

Hi Will,

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 2:24 AM, William Jon McCann
<william jon mccann gmail com> wrote:
> Hi Zeeshan,
>
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) <zeenix gmail com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Frederic Peters <fpeters gnome org> wrote:
>>> Matthias Clasen wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) <zeenix gmail com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>  It has been part of GNOME since 2.32 unless its been removed without
>>>> >> any notification to the maintainer (me).
>>>> >
>>>> >  We are still waiting on gnome release team for a reply on this.
>>>>
>>>> As I have said in earlier discussion around the new module sets,
>>>> adding things back to gnome-apps is free-for-all. If your module is
>>>> missing, feel free to add it there.
>>>
>>> I believe Rygel is not to be considered as an application but as core,
>>> just like gnome-user-share or vino; this calls for a release team
>>> action.
>>>
>>> And I JFDI, I added rygel to the moduleset.
>>
>>   I thought that meant rygel is back into gnome releases but now I
>> realized that its still forgotten and not made part of our releases.
>> Can someone please add it back? It feels really bad when I spend some
>> extra hours ensuring a release in time and then realizing later that
>> it was all in vein.
>
> As Matthias said, it was decided (I recall discussing it with you as
> well) that it is better leave gnome-user-share, rygel, vino, etc out
> of the core release until we finish the interfaces to them in the
> System Settings - Privacy & Sharing.

  I remember that but I don't recall that there was any clear decision
about removing these modules all together, I was under the impression
that we are moving them to 'apps' for now.

> We're still working on that and
> didn't get it done in time.  It would be better if we had but
> hopefully it is not the end of the world.  Anyone who needs them can
> still install them and configure them with the tools they include.  It
> was still worthwhile to do a release.

   Sure thing. I actually agree with the decision, just that I (as
maintainer of the module in question) should have been told in clear
words about it. I actually asked in one of the mails on this very
thread and I never got any replies so I assumed the reply was "Doh,
you really need to ask".

> I expect it to be a nicely integrated and featured part of 3.2.  Which
> will be upon us sooner than we think.

   I hope so too but please keep in mind that we'll need some help
when it comes to UI work. :)

-- 
Regards,

Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
FSF member#5124