I can't recall exactly what led to using file-roller but there's been length discussions about that which you can probably find in the archives. We're also open to alternative browsers, but it needs someone to take a look at that (like Steve did the previous release for e.g. media players). And yes, at the present time Midori really isn't stable enough, I suppose we at least want Christian to say it's stable :) I'd say that Chrome definitely should be looked at, although it's system integration isn't that good yet. And indeed, Chrome, too, has not yet had a stable release for Linux. As a side note, I'd like to emphasize that we should not look at whether something is a GNOME app, but to whether feature-wise, has good usability and, of course, performs well. This should also lead to a fast, smaller OS without discarding perfectly fine applications just because they fall under the umbrella of a particular organisation. That said, I do think we should check who the developers are, to avoid problems like the one with GDM, whose developers didn't really take non-GNOME environments into account with the new version. Best, <div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Christopher David Desjardins <<a href="mailto:cddesjardins@gmail.com">cddesjardins@gmail.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> I also was curious about the choice of file-roller instead of squeeze or xarchiver? I wonder if Midori is more mature by then if it might be included as well? Midori, in my testing, has been super fast. Otherwise, if Google has actually released a stable version of Google Chrome by 10.04, it might be nice to see Firefox replaced by Chrome on the CD. Again Chrome is much faster than Firefox. I think that the less reliance on GNOME apps the better, primarily because it creates a fast, smaller OS. <div class="im"> Vincent wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Steve Dodier <<a href="mailto:sidnioulz@gmail.com">sidnioulz@gmail.com</a> </div><div><div></div><div class="h5">> <mailto:<a href="mailto:sidnioulz@gmail.com">sidnioulz@gmail.com</a>>> wrote: > > Hi Christophe, > > While I'd like to investigate Xfburn over Brasero (but this takes > time to test the apps, make sure they work, etc, and my CD drive > kind of died), I don't think wicd can replace networkmanager, for > a very simple reason: it's GUI is really, really not intuitive and > easy to use. I haven't tested MPlayer for quite some time, but I > remember I clearly preferred Totem's GUI over the alternatives' > ones, because it was just simple and doing it's job for most basic > uses. I may one day recommend Parole over Totem, when I think it > came to feature parity, but I don't think MPlayer or VLC would be > any better for end users. > > > Also, IIRC Mplayer includes restricted codecs, which means Xubuntu > can't ship it due to legal issues. VLC uses the Qt toolkit since > version one, which means it would be more suitable for e.g. Kubuntu, > but not Xubuntu. And I also believe it had the same issue as Mplayer's. > > > -- > Vincent </div></div>-- xubuntu-devel mailing list <a href="mailto:xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com">xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com</a> <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel" target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel</a> </blockquote></div> -- Vincent