On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 20:14 -0500, Gerald Henriksen wrote: > 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. > Keep in mind it's a DRAFT and not a final copy yet, it has to be refined. The important part is here: --- GNOME 2 would be managed by a select committee made up of representatives sent directly from GNOME Foundation corporate sponsors. This committee would also donate a certain percentage of their engineers time to work on the GNOME projects with a focus on GNOME 2. This committee would would draw up GNOME 2 product requirements, act in an advisory capacity and have final say on official releases. GNOME 2 would be tied to RHEL and it's release cycles but there would be more frequent release channels available. --- https://wiki.gnome.org/AlexGS/GnomeMetaDesktop The corporate committee would basically control the product. It would be a diverse group of people. This way GNOME 2 could be managed correctly and shaped into a proper business desktop and workstation desktop environment. Just to let you know if you have comments or want to assist with getting this realized there's a COMMENT's section on the bottom of the proposal on the GNOME Wiki page. Please use that or Google+ for general matters. I don't want to distract the Fedora Developer list any further, I've caused enough of a ruckus. -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
