From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 6 13:23:46 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C1FF7A for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2013 13:23:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pb0-x233.google.com (mail-pb0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D7121B7E for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2013 13:23:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pb0-f51.google.com with SMTP id up15so1057180pbc.24 for ; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 05:23:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :content-type:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=abb/Cr6IN+m33F2a6Ej8W2/jVV243iNlfNfYBRQOUIc=; b=b6lE5gYBeO2fwy/YhLY25zUop5egJZUEP+b91LlQ15elABW+tcKoP1lbEjTpTr6+pU K/2dKT38w+nkL8UzBeI/06na9xCMfoz87kFvBfaxhlj3sLOVNdusVobiRSItzDv2fjye xUbuMY3ATpPKoTMQFgb+xFx9EEn0OrGNOXQKjPgV7dVN2VSjMYhrCfPLw7KG8AFJ8SeE nZ0uLYCChcZyobg/wIg8EZWU71FXPkEetjavCUjUOhO4UYICwjLccMpKp8mN9m6862Hg v4gPrZa0IuMzHGBQMqee2uSw8uDt9DLqY8ITRuhTya8EmfzDaKMLzt3tC9EMyHuTer1n U1UA== X-Received: by 10.68.219.72 with SMTP id pm8mr4191583pbc.164.1386336225764; Fri, 06 Dec 2013 05:23:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from [223.250.72.165] ([223.250.72.165]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id b3sm8549153pbu.38.2013.12.06.05.23.42 for (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 06 Dec 2013 05:23:45 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1386336219.4592.25.camel@debian> Subject: Re: Why FreeBSD doesn't have a Gnome3 port? From: iijima yoshino To: Luca Ferrari Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 21:23:39 +0800 In-Reply-To: References: <1386221592.4385.16.camel@debian> <1386253808.8359.5.camel@debian> <1386328855.3871.38.camel@debian> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: freebsd-questions X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 13:23:46 -0000 在 2013-12-06五的 13:36 +0100，Luca Ferrari写道： > On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 12:20 PM, iijima yoshino wrote: > > And we could not request every developer to > > put the portability No.1 when they try to write something. If I consider > > about Linux/BSD, why don't Win/Mac/Solaries/Minix/Haiku/MenutOS... We do > > everything for ourselves, then the others. > > With regard to the specific question, gnome3, I believe we are not > asking developers to keep portability as their number one issue. They > simply have broken portability by themselves. Gnome was used as the > main desktop on OpenSolaris, that is not Linux. But deciding to got > for a Linux-tied subsystem they have deliberately chosen not to be > portable. Is this right or wrong? I don't care, but we cannot ask > FreeBSD (or any other OS) developers to port gnome3 when the gnome > community itself has decided to break. Of course, is there is > interest, someone will port. > > Luca Yeah,it's not a "right or wrong" problem, as "to be or not to be". OpenBSD 5.4 supports Gnome 3.8 and PCBSD 10 will take Gnome3/Cinnamon replacing Gnome2. In fact, the FreeBSD can do but not do, Why? Different philosophy? Bad compatibility? Dependencies conflict? No interest? Something else? Whatever the reason is, having an "evil" gnome3 port would never boom the machine.