>I'd like to support the proposal to package MATE. +1 >While I agree there is code duplication, that's obviously something that >will take some time to remove, however I also believe it's important >not to wait until it's cleaned.
++1 I strongly agree with Dave, we should not wait to solve this issues. There is enough potential for Mate to live on a non competing space to GNOME3 which will not run on modest or old hardware (e.g. arm based computers, computer with no hardware acceleration). There is also enough murmur and frustration about the lack of feedback acceptance from from GNOME developers. Personally, I feel the applications in GNOME are dumbed versions of their counterparts in GNOME2 only re-written in GTK3. This is not usable to me. And I am not alone out there. There are enough people who devote the time making whole Debian distros including MATE: http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=descentos http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=leeenux http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=snowlinux http://linuxmint.com/ Not debian based: http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=salix This works could be directly invested in Debian. Project like Skolelinux, or Debian Edu, which already used GNOME2 based environment will suffer badly if they will be forced to migrade to GNOME3 on thin clients. MATE will be an excellent continuation for their project. And will also save a lot of time re-designing XCFE to feet into thin clients. Please, do not block MATE in Debian, and let it live in peace side by side to GNOME3. I rolled up my sleeves and learned how to package mate to debian, and I willing to contribute to the efforts of cleaning duplicate codes and making MATE a viable alternative in Debian. Best Regards, Oz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cadkmuwnbgvu6pglhooyeyp5enwnfyz9h-sogtagjwzcdlop...@mail.gmail.com
