On Wed, 05 Feb 2014 15:27:41 -0500, you wrote: >On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 12:08 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: >> The GNOME we're trying to build has its own vision, and it's trying to >> become its own well-defined product: The number-one free software >> operating system. > >Not it's not. This means that they have a single dedicated desktop >experience and that the community is allowed to use those components but >there isn't a formal mechanism to standardize to a common core. It also >excludes any potential requirements for a separate desktop environment >for commercial vendors. If you actually read my Proposal you would >realize that. > >I have worked out a compromise that works for GNOME 3, GNOME 2 and the >Gnome community projects. It's called the GNOME Meta-Desktop. All your proposal does is formalize the current GTK desktop world mess into an official product that solves none of the problems. You can't say your proposal provides a "single dedicated desktop experience" while at the same time claiming to offer a GNOME 3 and GNOME 2 experience - those 2 products have fundamentally different design goals and experiences. Third party developers want 1 target to aim for, and whether is is the current mess of GNOME / Cinnamon / MATE (plus KDE) or your GNOME Meta-Desktop the problem is not solved because there is no 1 target. -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
