RE: communication

"Willy" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.xfree86.forum
Organization Dialog.SFT-Service
Message-ID <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAaeILTeDM0hGwkgBgl7H548KAAAAQAAAA6bZKHpJtBUaIw9jfRlTX2gEAAAAA@sft.ru>
Hi!

> I think it would be good if XFree86 Core Developers subscribe to 
> <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> and 
> <[email protected]> (where inter-operability among 
> different Desktops 
> is discussed).
> Besides, we should post message to those lists as well with 
> invitation to join 
> <[email protected]> and discuss XFree86 future.
Can't disagree, but it seems a lot of work (or discussions, technical
questions, etc.) already waiting for us. Joinig developers from
"end user" (mean X users) lists will add more themes to discuss and
we'll spend all time to classify/join/split tasks needed to be done.
But if main conceptual things of X redesign/reengeneering will be done,
many questions will go away, and rest will go into right place.
I'm not right ?

> Communication doesn't work when it's monologue. We should 
> have dialogue and 
> take into consideration not only XFree86 Project requirements, but 
> requirements of GNOME, KDE, Rox, Nautilus, etc. teams as well.
In general, lot of things needed by "desktops" already known. Isn't ?
And, once more, we need redesinged X, development process,
etc. to start _seriously_ enhance features.

> I understand that reading 2-3 mailing lists (in addition to 
> <[email protected]>) would take more time, but not ethat 
> subscribing & 
> reading XFree86 lists (in particular, Devel list) also takes time.
> So, projects should make step to each other in order to 
> improve communication.
May be we'll start to write TODOs ?
 
> Vadim Plessky
> SVG Icons * BlueSphere Icons 0.3.0 released
> http://svgicons.sourceforge.net
> 
/aTan
smime.p7s (application/x-pkcs7-signature, 2.5 KB) - not displayed
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.