Why is Tomboy permissible in the default Ubuntu Desktop?
buhitoescolar at gmail.com
Sun Dec 27 17:34:44 GMT 2009
I wonder the same. I don't even take notes, and if I were to take, I
would use something simpler, like Gedit. I even created a brainstorm
idea, but it failed to get any reviewer approvals, and it was closed:
Also, from all the Ubuntu users I know, none of them actually take
notes. They are all "home users", maybe a note-taking app is more
enterprise-oriented? And if this is the case, maybe the evolution tool
for that is more useful and more integrated with the rest of the tools
Like Jo-Erlend Schinstad, I'll also be glad to know why is Tomboy
still in the default install.
2009/12/27 Jo-Erlend Schinstad <joerlend.schinstad at gmail.com>:
> I've never used Tomboy much myself. To me, it seems like a cool
> prototype, showing what's possible, but for my daily note management, I
> use Evolution. And that's where my question pops up: an important part
> of Ubuntus design philosophy, is that there should be only one
> application per feature. As I understand it, that's the reason why we
> don't have any special application for RSS-feeds, for instance, since
> Firefox already supports feeds and is installed by default. What is the
> reasoning behind making Tomboy an exception to this rule? I would think
> that adding Liferea for feed management, would be less overlapping than
> adding another note manager besides Evolution? I've always accepted not
> having a good feed manager by default, because I feel that the concept
> of not having overlapping features in different applications has more
> positive sides than negative. But I really don't understand what makes
> Tomboy so special that it warrants an exception to this rule.
> I'm not looking to fire up a discussion about Mono or anything like
> that, though that dependency makes the exception even stranger to me.
> Jo-Erlend Schinstad
> ubuntu-desktop mailing list
> ubuntu-desktop at lists.ubuntu.com
More information about the ubuntu-desktop