From owner-freebsd-gnome Wed Oct 2 10:22:14 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1429837B401; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 10:22:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from creme-brulee.marcuscom.com (rdu57-17-158.nc.rr.com [66.57.17.158]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6597443E42; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 10:22:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcus@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [10.2.1.2] (vpn-client-2.marcuscom.com [10.2.1.2]) by creme-brulee.marcuscom.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g92HHNiv007708; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 13:17:23 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from marcus@FreeBSD.org) Subject: Re: GNOME 2.1 upgrade From: Joe Marcus Clarke To: Maxim Sobolev Cc: Franz Klammer , Marc Recht , aztlanet@gmx.net, gnome@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <3D9B2535.72563F59@FreeBSD.org> References: <1033527725.295.11.camel@unxstar> <20021002104009.5a55baec.recht@contentmedia.de> <1033548212.1085.1.camel@gyros.marcuscom.com> <20021002104727.590f03a0.recht@contentmedia.de> <1033558909.38552.2.camel@ncc-1701.webonaut.com> <3D9B2535.72563F59@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 02 Oct 2002 13:21:51 -0400 Message-Id: <1033579311.333.43.camel@gyros.marcuscom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES, SPAM_PHRASE_00_01 version=2.41 Sender: owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 2002-10-02 at 12:56, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Franz Klammer wrote: > > > > Am Mi, 2002-10-02 um 10.47 schrieb Marc Recht: > > > > This isn't going to happen anytime soon. We're shipping 4.7-RELEASE > > > > with 1.4.1 as the default GNOME desktop. The primary reasons being lack > > > Oh. Ok, then dropping 1.4.1 isn't that good idea.. :-) > > > > > > > of fully working I18N and most GNOME 2 apps are still beta at best. > > > Indeed. > > > > > > > I think doing -devel versions is the way to go if 2.1 is put into the > > > > tree. The downside of this is that there will be one more version of > > > > GNOME to support. > > > But, as you mentioned yourself, GNOME2 is beta. So, why not replacing the components with "official" beta versions? > > > > > from this point of view i go along with marc. > > > > maybee you send some people the ports who want test 2.1 > > and if they don't have problems commit them. > > > > i glad to test the ports because there are still my xinerma-problems. > > currently i've turend off my second monitor. > > I agree with Franz and Marc - we don't really need to have yet another > GNOME version in the tree. Okay, so here's what I'll do. I'll create 2.1 ports, but keep them on my marcuscom.com server. People that want to test, can. When 2.2 goes final, I'll upgrade the GNOME 2 components with my ports. I'll even throw the ports into marcuscom CVS for those wanting to contribute. Does this sound okay? Joe > > -Maxim > -- Joe Marcus Clarke FreeBSD GNOME Team :: marcus@FreeBSD.org http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-gnome" in the body of the message