Slashdot Mirror
Havoc Pennington on GNOME 3's Future
An anonymous reader writes "Havoc Pennington, lead developer of GNOME, wants to fork GNOME 3.
'So the forces of existing userbase, the easiest-to-reach future userbase, cross-platform applications, and funded development efforts are strongly pulling GNOME 2 toward conservatism. I think GNOME 3 should be a fork for that reason.'" This has been a common practice for not only many open source projects, but proprietary systems such as Solaris for major revisions, so it's not as tumultous a change as the word "fork" may imply.
Darn those pesky users for making us stablize things instead of hacking cool new features! I mean, which would you rather have, a foot menu that works or spatial Nautilus?
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
why would it? While the Gnome 2.x are clearly reserved for the currect gnome development, a major version change may mean several deep changes, and the creation of a "double tree" as the development of Gnome 2.x keeps on living during the birth and maturation of Gnome 3. Ever heard of Winamp3? (well, ok, it failed, but then we could get Gnome 5 couldn't we?)
"The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
Why doesn't he just join up with KDE? Theres enough bulk in KDE that it should fit his needs nicely.
There is no fork.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Maybe they could call it Gnom3?
"For years, I struggled with reality... but I'm happy to say I finally won out over it." -- Elwood P. Dowd
oh wait, there is no spoon
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
They should do that! At least, if they are not able to have better functionnalities than KDE, they can claim they have a bigger revision number! :p
Or 'midGet'?
"Let's not make any configuration options available to the users at all! No settings, preiod. If they think they are smart enough to reconfigure the product, let them read through the source and figure out what cryptic Gconf keys they need to hack. Yeah!" Seriously though, is forking such a good idea? I can't say I've run into too many gnome bugs (and I use it everywhere.) What gnome really needs, like a number of large-scale open-source products, is to have all the features 'finalized.' It seems that some things are just not quite finished, or some things hint at integration, yet it is not as complete as it should be. Finish the main features, then fork off that. Why not?
ph34r 6|\|0|\/|3 |\|3\/\/B!!!! OMG!!!~!~#@!~~!!!
Not lame.
What about a similar but distinct name for the experimental version (ala Fedora from Redhat). Possible names:
(By the way, I have your book on GTK app development... It's very good. Thanks.)
Let's add Evolution to the mix for kicks...that makes GNOME/OO.org/Mozilla/Evolution...whose acronym is GNOME!
Obviously this is a sign from the Gods Of Recursive Elegance (GORE? He's in on it too?) that we're on the right track.
-- Microsoft is the most expensive commodity operating system and office suite vendor in the marketplace.
Careful which ones you sniff. Many mimes are French.