1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> [Mageia-dev] GNOME 3.2 or 3.4 for Mageia 2?
</TITLE>
<LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" >
<LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20GNOME%203.2%20or%203.4%20for%20Mageia%202%3F&In-Reply-To=%3CCAL%2BdqvBDHE%3DNOyatyZ%2BMZoHGpSDin4G8GfoEQovP9Gr-CjEg3A%40mail.gmail.com%3E">
<META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow">
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<LINK REL="Previous" HREF="008571.html">
<LINK REL="Next" HREF="008590.html">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff">
<H1>[Mageia-dev] GNOME 3.2 or 3.4 for Mageia 2?</H1>
<B>D.Morgan</B>
<A HREF="mailto:mageia-dev%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-dev%5D%20GNOME%203.2%20or%203.4%20for%20Mageia%202%3F&In-Reply-To=%3CCAL%2BdqvBDHE%3DNOyatyZ%2BMZoHGpSDin4G8GfoEQovP9Gr-CjEg3A%40mail.gmail.com%3E"
TITLE="[Mageia-dev] GNOME 3.2 or 3.4 for Mageia 2?">dmorganec at gmail.com
</A><BR>
<I>Sat Oct 1 11:02:57 CEST 2011</I>
<P><UL>
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="008571.html">[Mageia-dev] GNOME 3.2 or 3.4 for Mageia 2?
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="008590.html">[Mageia-dev] GNOME 3.2 or 3.4 for Mageia 2?
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#8577">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#8577">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#8577">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#8577">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<HR>
<!--beginarticle-->
<PRE>On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 5:06 AM, Olav Vitters <<A HREF="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">olav at vitters.nl</A>> wrote:
><i> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 05:52:06PM +0200, Samuel Verschelde wrote:
</I>>><i> Le vendredi 30 septembre 2011 15:00:45, Olav Vitters a écrit :
</I>>><i> > On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 09:33:59PM +0200, Samuel Verschelde wrote:
</I>>><i> > > However, how great is GNOME 3.4 going to be as compared to 3.2.2 ? :)
</I>>><i> >
</I>>><i> > For me it is multiple things:
</I>>><i> > 1. More stable; The more people use a recent version of GNOME, more
</I>>><i> >    fixes will go into GNOME and long term GNOME is more stable
</I>>><i> >
</I>>><i> >    Basically: if your GNOME version is old, developers spend less time
</I>>><i> >    on it, because they assume the issue is probably fixed. So, IMO, to
</I>>><i> >    ensure GNOME stays at a high quality, you have to provide a recent
</I>>><i> >    version... staying 1 version behind only works for short term (the
</I>>><i> >    "Release early, release often" mindset).
</I>>><i>
</I>>><i> Did I misunderstand , or is GNOME 3.2 not going to have any fixes after 3.2.2,
</I>>><i> although 3.4 will still not be ready at that time, leaving users with several
</I>>><i> months without any fixes ? I would understand that 3.2 would stop being
</I>>><i> supported a few months after 3.4 is out, but if really support stops *before*,
</I>>><i> that's puzzling :)
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Nothing new, has been like this for various releases. We did use to do a
</I>><i> .3 release, but it takes quite a lot of time to do that, and we didn't
</I>><i> see the benefit. No distro also complained to GNOME for the lack of a .3
</I>><i> release.
</I>><i>
</I>><i> Note that it only relates to whole of GNOME, if a maintainer wants to
</I>><i> make another release, they're free to do so. Most do not though, but
</I>><i> some do.
</I>><i>
</I>>><i> For small projects, I can understand that developers always want to you to use
</I>>><i> the latest (lastest stable version at least), but for bigger projects such as
</I>>><i> a DE, I would find it surprising. We all know that once a major version has
</I>>><i> been released, it will have users for years.
</I>><i>
</I>><i> I think you're getting the intention wrong. GNOME 3.2 is a bugfix for
</I>><i> 3.0; 3.4 is a bugfix for 3.2. If distributions want to rely on an older
</I>><i> version, that is nice, but as it is their choice.
</I>
i think 3.4 would be a nice choice ut as told it depends of the
schedule. If you think this can be ok, i trust you.
Is it doable to do like mikala for kde and do updates for gnome 3.4.x
during mageia lifecycle ?
</PRE>
<!--endarticle-->
<HR>
<P><UL>
<!--threads-->
<LI>Previous message: <A HREF="008571.html">[Mageia-dev] GNOME 3.2 or 3.4 for Mageia 2?
</A></li>
<LI>Next message: <A HREF="008590.html">[Mageia-dev] GNOME 3.2 or 3.4 for Mageia 2?
</A></li>
<LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B>
<a href="date.html#8577">[ date ]</a>
<a href="thread.html#8577">[ thread ]</a>
<a href="subject.html#8577">[ subject ]</a>
<a href="author.html#8577">[ author ]</a>
</LI>
</UL>
<hr>
<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-dev">More information about the Mageia-dev
mailing list</a><br>
</body></html>
|
