> > 1) Move GGI to sourceforge.
> I strongly agree, if only because they provide some very good infrastructure,
> such as task management, etc.
See my other mail. Regarding the task management ...: We had a bug reporting
site up before. It just wasn't used. That didn't hurt as long as the ML
was the bug reporting site ... but now even the ML is pretty dead.
I think waking people up is more important than changing technical details.
I have grabbed a copy of the website-cvs and I have added the separated
kgicon/libs/libgii/libggi snapshots to the snapshot generation system.
Should run first time tonight. Hope I didn't break anything.
I still have to add it into the pages, but they should appear on FTP.
All that stuff is just a half-an-hour-job - but I got lots of those. And
when I ask some people to do even just a little installation testing
_nothing_ happens.
The point is still, that our technical infrastructure is working - its
us that is malfunctioning.
> But the proliferation of new ideas in the context of unfinished existing
> work was always something which worried me in this project. I think this
> is at the heart of my criticism.
Yes. You are right. Let's get our job done finally. Let's test LibGGI and
make it release-ready.
When we have rounded all the edges, we can release it and let users help us
to catch the things we missed.
When we thus have a _rock_solid_ base to build on, then let's attack the
other stuff.
CU, ANdy
--
= Andreas Beck | Email : <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
