No more module proposals - decisions need to be made
Anand Kumria
wildfire at progsoc.org
Mon Oct 11 19:34:49 EEST 2004
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:43:26 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I continue to feel it's silly to pull in dependencies that have nothing
> to do with freedesktop.org and specifically interoperability. In the
> spirit of keeping the first platform release uncontroversial and safe I
> think these should be left out. We should be strongly erring on the side
> of *fewer* modules.
>
> So that implies, in my opinion which people are free to argue with:
[gutting of proposed modules list]
Hmm, I was under the impression that the future might be something like
this:
purchase RHEL4, note it supports:
- LSB 2.1
- Freedesktop.Org Platform 1.2
- GNOME Desktop 2.B
- KDE Springboard 0.6
purchase Quark, note it requires:
- x86 / PPC
- lots of memory and disk
- LSB 2.0
- FreeDesktop.Org Platform 1.1
and
purchase TurboTAX:"Attack of the IRS", note it requires:
- x86
- connection to Internet
- LSB 1.1
- Freedesktop.Org Platform 1.0
and feel confident that both programs would run without issue on my
distribution. Thus I would actually kick out of all the proposed -specs
(does it make sense to say you 'implement' a platform?) and have:
zlib (1.2.1), startup-notification (0.7), fontconfig (2.2.x), libjpeg
(v6b), libpng (1.2.x), libxml2 (2.6.x), X (X.Org 6.7.x, XFree86 4.3)
As actual implementations third-parties can rely on once they see
Freedesktop.Org Platform X.Y support.
I wish I had noticed the proposal stuff a bit earlier, as I would have
suggested:
shared-mime-info (0.15)
- implies glib
- intltool
desktop-file-utils (0.9)
- implies popt
- implies glib
as two other useful implementations to have in the initial Freedesktop.Org
Platform.
Cheers,
Anand
More information about the platform
mailing list