← Back to team overview

ubuntu-gnome team mailing list archive

Re: Suggestion for a possibility to have a stable version of Ubuntu Gnome 3.6


On 7 September 2012 03:18, Julien Olivier <julo42@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I must be missing something, obviously, but what prevents us from
> having multiple versions of the problematic packages (nautilus, totem
> and the needed libraries) in the repository and have
> ubuntu-gnome-desktop depend on the latest versions while
> ubuntu-desktop depends on the oldest versions? It's already possible
> for other packages like gstreamer or python AFAIK.

Having those multiple versions is possible, but it adds a lot of
complexity for little benefit. I don't believe any Ubuntu developers
will bother doing all of that work for 12.10 when there are other,
more interesting, more important problems to be worked on. From the
command line, adding the GNOME3 PPA is as easy as:

sudo add-apt-repository ppa:gnome3-team/gnome3
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get dist-upgrade

And it's nearly as easy from the GUI.

> 2012/9/6 Ebbe Rasmussen <emrdanmark@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> As we can't have a clean Gnome 3.6 because of Unity's dependencies and the
>> goal to be an official release, I have thought about the second best
>> solution to this dilemma.
>> I think that would be to have a "stable ppa" for the, that would include the
>> latest stable version of Gnome, the missing Gnome-parts from Ubuntu to make
>> stable Gnome 3.6, 3.8..... maintained by the "Ubuntu Gnome Remix Developers"
>> team,
>> or use the “GNOME3 Team” ppa if that's better.
>> This ppa should be available in package-kit / software-center / synaptic,
>> but not be enabled by default.
>> It would give the user the possibility to choose between the official and
>> the upstream release and we wouldn't have to rely on any testing ppa's for
>> an upstream Gnome experience.
>> What do you think ?

Personally, I don't think we should pursue that idea. It would be an
extra hurdle for when we hopefully go before the Tech Board in the
coming months. It doesn't really make things much easier to replace
"Paste this into Software Sources" with "Check this box in Software


Follow ups