After all the discussions and meetings we had about freedesktop.org during the Gran Canaria Desktop Summit and on the xdg mailing list, I have now written down a more formal version of the process we talked about, so we can sort out all the details and decide on a final procedure how to document specifications and define what is an accepted freedesktop.org specification. This hopefully will fix freedesktop.org.
To bootstrap the process I wrote it down as a freedesktop.org specification for the freedesktop.org Specification Process.
The next step is to get comments and incorporate them into the document. So if you have comments please let me know, respond to the thread on the xdg mailing list, or provide a patch to the document.
When comments are incorporated we can merge the specification back into the main specification repository and get acceptance by the desktop communities.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Team Profile
What makes a great team? One important factor is that you have a balanced set of skills and personalities in the team. A team which only con...
-
For SUSE Studio we are looking into adding nice permalinks to appliances. This turns out to be an amazingly difficult problem. The implemen...
-
Last week I had written about my ideas for the fourth openSUSE Hackweek . I got quite some feedback and most people seem to think that the K... -
My goal for the fourth openSUSE Hack Week was to create a KDE SDK . When I started I thought this was mostly a technical challenge. I coded...
The names of the desktop environments shouldn't be hardcoded as there is no guarantee that they will be the main ones in the future.
ReplyDeleteGreat!
ReplyDeleteThere's one "</revision>" too many in the specification meta data format example, and I agree with nico.