seed changes

[Jani Monoses]

Jérôme Guelfucci wrote:
> As I said in my first post in this thread, I'm backing a bit from
> Xubuntu development. I , just to see how things evolve... I don't see
> why I should do something you've never done Jani, I've read your open
> development posts:
> 
> "X is unmaintained, it bugs, Y is supported in Ubuntu and has more features."
> 
> XFCE is NOT ACTIVELY maintained, just look at the commits mailing
> list... If you want something maintained as Gnome, then drop XFCE,
> it's not for you... I agree this is frustrating, but we can't do
> anything for this, except sending them patches : I thank you for all
> your gnome patches which will certainly contribute to kill all gnome
> libs in gnome itself, which is a very good progress, but the "I find a
> bug in XFCE and I patch Gnome" attitude is not for me, you may have
> your reasons, but I do not see the point. The time it took you could
> have been better spent on XFCE, if this is your goal... and you have
> the knowledge to do it..

This is not about Xfce or GNOME cores. So bringing Xfce in the question 
is not relevant. It is about the extra apps that make a good desktop but 
which the Xfce project does not provide.

> 
> You can bring this in front of the community council, it'll be very
> funny : "The developpers of Xubuntu modify the seeds whithout asking
> Jani." You know of course that if Alpha 4 was released, there would
> have been release notes (which means that you would have been aware of
> the changes...)...

Release notes are no substitute for development plans and explanations 
of what is happening. I am sure the release notes would not have 
contained why those apps were switched.
The list is the appropriate place for such detailed explanations.


> 
> As you can notice, I stepped down in this discussion : there is not
> point in discussing with you, you are as narrow minded as you say we

No I am not. You are avoiding the questions. You realize that instead of
accusing me of anything you could have simply explained the benefits to
users of the seed changes and it would have been a closed topic.

That was 12 days ago and no valid answer has come forward, except that I 
should not question your actions because you are the active developers 
now. Which is weird. Certainly not something I would expect from the 
leaders of any open source project.

> are, and you can't let the baby you created evolve without you... You
> warned me about a possible loss of testers, or whatever (who are very
> active by the way, only took two weeks to notice that all isos were
> broken), but you are losing developpers... For at least two years,
> packaging has been done by Gauvain, then by Lionel, with ponctual
> contributions of Cody, same for bug triaging. And I've never felt a
> more closed development than when you were parading on the top of
> this...

You should have said you felt the development was closed if you felt so.
Noone ever told me that so stating this 6 months later is not much help.
I am sorry if my practices felt closed (I don't see them that way) but
you should have spoken, as I did now.
> 
> I've already lost more time than necessary with this, I guess this
> post was as needless as the rest of the discussion.

True, we all lost time. I would have preferred one mail with 5-6 
paragraphs explaining why you changed back to those 5-6 apps, and at 
most a technical discussion would have followed.

Jani