On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:58:04 +0200, Stephan Binner wrote:
My point is rather what did the second change/decision improve? Did GNOME numbers jump to the sky? Or did it rather alienate majority of KDE users?
I would suggest that if the ordering of the options (or the inclusion of GNOME in the main selection list) alienated some KDE users, then those users who were alienated need to get a thicker skin and stop worrying about the fact that the installation screen provides a *choice*. As a GNOME user, I'm not bothered by the inclusion of KDE 3.5 and KDE 4.0 in the installation. People want to use one of those releases, that's cool, it's not my preference, so I'm not inclined to select it as the primary interface at installation time. What I'm really curious about is what it is that those who *are* threatened by the inclusion of a GNOME option (clearly not all KDE users are threatened by this, so we're talking about what I sincerely hope is a small group of vocal people) are so afraid of with the inclusion of GNOME or the lack of a pre-selection being made for KDE. Are they afraid that users might decide to use something other than KDE and that will somehow cause resource allocation to the KDE project (which is not controlled by Novell *or* openSUSE) to be diminished? If you don't want GNOME as a choice (or want a pre-selected KDE installation), then there's an answer to that: Use SUSE Studio to create your own installation media that has what you want in it. I would far rather see the project's focus not be diverted by what is essentially a religious debate about which desktop is better, because neither is better in an absolute manner, because users have different needs. "Better" for me is not "better" for other users. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org