Correcting Marks statement:
He talks about App Indicators, saying that “They didn’t even propose changes to core GNOME components to support application indicators.” Actually, we did, and those changes required App Indicators to be an external dependency. So we proposed that, and it was rejected. Repeat ad absurdum.
This is not correct. Applications can depend on a library without it being an external dependency. If it is not an external dependency, the support must be optional. This so distributions do not have to deal with ever increasing dependencies. We have various optional dependencies.
Furthermore, the library was not accepted (the ‘rejected’ is often interpreted as permanent rejection, while this was never meant in this way) for GNOME 3.0.x. Not the whole idea. Not the spec. Also, something similar can be proposed again for 3.2. Though really really suggest to at least assume we mean well, and understand the feedback that was given.
Unfortunately, I’m repeating what has been stated before.
What I find most unfortunate: I saw no email to release-team asking for clarification. I fail to see what the point is of continuing this via blogposts. I find it fairly strange way if the purpose is to actually have a constructive conversation.
Suggest the ‘assume people mean well’ once again. And ehr.. people are working for a long time on releasing GNOME 3.0.