Re: Plan to fix icons [was: Re: breakage caused by removed icons from gnome-icon-theme]

Jeff Waugh <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gnome.desktop,gmane.comp.gnome.themes
Message-ID <[email protected]>
<quote who="Elijah Newren">

> > Dude, why are we supporting this *wholly inappropriate* late breakage? This
> > is not the kind of change that we should meekly accept at this stage of the
> > release process. We don't *have* to do this, and we *shouldn't* do it. This
> > is a choice between release discipline and riding a train wreck.
> 
> I don't believe this is a fair representation.  Rodney made the change
> mid-January, and released it in the gnome-icon-themes-2.13.5 tarball. 
> He also notified desktop-devel-list, at
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-January/msg00302.html.
>  Now, he did miss feature freeze by about a day, so if this is
> considered a new feature then sure it was late (though just barely). 
> I had thought it was just a UI change, which he beat the deadline for
> by a few weeks.

This really goes deeper than 'feature' or 'UI' change. I would not be making
a fuss if it were that simple, without unintended side-effects, or without
creating a whole new class of bugs to deal with in just one month. This is a
major change which ought to be done at the start of a release process, with
a strategy for tackling bugs (very much like what Federico has suggested) as
they come up.

Look at the conversation about making g-i-t a 'platform API' - now how major
do you think this change is? :-)

- Jeff

-- 
FOSDEM 2006: Brussels, Belgium                    http://www.fosdem.org/2006
 
  We're kind of like Canada, only we hate ourselves more, and it's wetter
                             around the edges.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.