4.4 ETA?

Brian J. Tarricone bjt23 at cornell.edu
Mon Dec 5 13:50:06 CET 2005

Hash: SHA1

Jani Monoses wrote:
>>1.  I'd feel a bit uncomfortable with someone distributing a non-release
>>version, unless they'd done a significant amount of stabilisation work
> We'll definitely not use a non-release version, although from what I
> gather xfce components are so independent that being release quality is
> a state some parts will reach earlier than others. Picking (just as an
> example) xfdesktop from 4.3 keeping the rest the same would not
> technically mean 'using an unreleased version of xfce'.

Yes, it would indeed mean "using an unreleased version of Xfce". The
core components of Xfce are developed as a whole.  They undergo beta and
release-candidacy all at the same time.  Since most people probably
install at least all of the core components (with some exceptions), each
part gets roughly the same testing.

There's certainly variation as to the stability of each part, since
different people work on them, and there have been differing amount of
changes.  Your example use is pretty poor: I know for a fact that
xfdesktop 4.3 isn't release-worthy at this point.  Other modules may be:
for example, xfce4-session hasn't changed all that much from 4.2, so I'd
expect it to be a lot more stable (and for other reasons too).  The
panel has been almost completley rewritten, so I'd expect it to need
time to stabilise.

> I know mix and
> match can be dangerous as it makes the components interact in way are
> less frequently tested so I'll try being careful.

What does "careful" mean?

> Especially with the
> transaltions argument thrown in it looks like 4.2 would be a lot less
> risky to consider.


>>2.  If you're going to call it an Xfce-based distro, it would be nice to
>>use all "official" Xfce components, or at least make the defaults all
>>official, and offer easy choices later on.  If not, you should probably
>>call it something else.  If you want to supplement the base Xfce with
> it is xfce 'based' so it is clear that it has other components in it.

Right, but if you swap out core Xfce components for others (e.g.,
xfdesktop for nautilus, or xfwm4 for metacity), it's not really Xfce
anymore; it just contains Xfce components.

> As
> for using all official components you said in an earlier email there may
>  not be  officially blessed versions for some apps (i.e. Terminal vs
> xfce4-terminal)

Just to clear up any possible confusion about this particular case: Xfce
does not have a 'blessed' terminal emulator.  My personal preference
here is Terminal, as xfce4-terminal is rather feature-poor and mostly
unmaintained and not actively developed at this point.

> We'll try to pick the best apps for everything and one of the reasons
> for me lurking on this list is to get help from you in deciding what
> 'best' is.

Really, please just try everything out, both the stable 4.2 release and
current SVN.  Try out xfburn, orage, xfmedia, Terminal, xffm, Thunar,
mousepad, etc.  Try out their competitors that are usually associated
with other desktop environments (or not associated with a DE at all).
It's fine to ask people what they think is best, but it's your distro:
in the end you have to support it, and you should leave the ultimate
determination of what is best for your distro to yourself, based on your
own use of the software.


Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the Xfce4-dev mailing list