Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 14:21:08 +0200 From: Rolf Grossmann <rg@progtech.net> To: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> Cc: FreeBSD GNOME Users <gnome@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: xscreensaver port forced to old libxml Message-ID: <3E9E9C34.9020102@PROGTECH.net> In-Reply-To: <1050533129.82754.15.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> References: <200304161859.h3GIxhq03242@isis.muc.progtech.intern> <1050533129.82754.15.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: >>In general, I'm wondering, when a software package supports both gnome1 and >>gnome2, should we be supporting both versions or stick with gnome1 for the >>time being? >> >> > >It depends. Right now, we try to support both if the application has >two sustaining branches (e.g. gnumeric, AbiWord, etc.). For ports that >simply switch from GNOME 1 to GNOME 2, so do we (e.g. dia, gaim, etc.). > What about applications that support both GNOME 1 and GNOME 2 from the same package? xscreensaver apparently does, which is why I was asking in the first place, and the same goes for ethereal (which I'm currently looking at). >Given that GNOME 2 is becoming much more mature, I think it's time we >ditch the GNOME 1 desktop. > That's exactly what I'm trying to do, so you certainly have my vote ;) So, if I wanted to help, should I send in patches to convert ports directly to GNOME 2? Bye, Rolf
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E9E9C34.9020102>