Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>]

On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 10:39 -0700, Eric Sandall wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 01:58 +0200, Ladislav Hagara wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > imho, GNOME 3 is prepared to be pulled into test grimoire.
> > Now it is located in devel-gnome-3.0.0 branch [1].
> > Please test it.
> > 
> > Still there is a question what to do with libs and applications. I
> > updated for example epiphany, evince or even eog2 in gnome2-libs and
> > gnome2-apps into 3.0.0. Some developers would prefer to create new
> > spells epiphany3, evince3 and eog3 and create gnome3-apps section. Imho,
> > it is only a lot of useless work. Grimoire lead is also against creating
> > for example spiphany3 spell. Why use epiphany 2.30 when the stable one
> > is 3.0? If spell names are not changed users can easily update their
> > boxes by sorcery system-update and we won't have to deprecated old
> > spells. Personally I would prefer to have only gnome-apps and gnome-libs
> > sections. Of course, for applications based on gnome2 libraries we will
> > provide spells for them. For example I have created spells for new 3.0
> > libraries gnome-desktop3, gtksourceview3, libwnck3 and libunique because
> > some of my favourite applications still need gnome2-libs. For what other
> > libs we should create libxxx3 spells and revert libxxx2 in
> > devel-gnome-3.0.0?
> > 
> > Of course we have to fix DEPENDS files and ..., but I would prefer to do
> > it after we pull gnome-3.0.0 into test to prevent collisions.
> > 
> > Gnome-shell works for me like a charm. Of course there is a fallback
> > mode with gnome-panel.
> > 
> > [1]
> > http://scmweb.sourcemage.org/gitweb.cgi?p=smgl/grimoire.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/devel-gnome-3.0.0
> 
> My personal preference would be to properly deprecate the older DEs
> (e.g. KDE 3, GNOME 1.x, GNOME 2.x) in favour of the new (e.g. KDE 4,
> GNOME 3) if upstream does the same (which they have). Otherwise, we get
> old stagnant spells which are never touched and probably don't even work
> anymore. We're supposed to follow upstream as much as possible. ;)
> 
> That being said, so long as the old DE still works, we could still
> support it (e.g. GNOME 2.x). Further weight is lent to keeping the older
> DE when packages still require it, or portions of it.
> 
> Can GNOME 3.x and GNOME 2.x co-exist? I know KDE 3 and KDE 4 can, but
> that required extra work (and placing KDE 4 into /opt).
> 
> Given the above, and that folks have expressed a need (valid to them, at
> the least) to keep the old DE around, we should work to provide both,
> preferably with both installed side-by-side, but if that's not possible,
> then making all new GNOME 3 spells where needed and leaving the GNOME 2
> spells as-is.

So this came up again as I reverted some packages which broke older
GNOME spells (e.g. empathy), but worked with the newer GNOME 3 in test.
What's the plan? Have the spells in devel-gnome-3-0-0 been done so that
they can co-exist with gnome2 or would they upgrade gnome2 to gnome3 (I
believe the latter from what little I've read of the changes in that
branch)?

Anyone willing to work on having gnome2/gnome3 co-exist? If not, I see
no valid reason to keep gnome2 around (or the older KDE's for that
matter) as we try to follow upstream for what's supported.

-sandalle

-- 
Eric Sandall                     |  Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric AT sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61  |  http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/          |  http://counter.li.org/  #196285

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part