Skip navigation.

GNOME 2.14.0 Release Candidate

Gnome 2.x
Gnome 2.x

Woohooo! This is our last unstable release before the big .0 release.
Lots of new features and bug fixes have been added during this cycle,
probably more than what you can remember if you've been running all the
unstable releases so far. But if you can remember, then you're ready to
help with the release notes :-)

See this mail for instructions on how to
contribute to the 2.14.0 release notes:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/marketing-list/2006-February/msg00051.html

The release notes that describe the changes between 2.13.91 and 2.13.92
are available. Go read them to learn all the goodness of this release:

platform - http://download.gnome.org/platform/2.13/2.13.92/NEWS
desktop - http://download.gnome.org/desktop/2.13/2.13.92/NEWS
admin - http://download.gnome.org/admin/2.13/2.13.92/NEWS
bindings - http://download.gnome.org/bindings/2.13/2.13.92/NEWS

Basic ambrosial stats:

admin 2.13.92 statistics:
tar.gz: 784K total
tar.bz2: 612K total

bindings 2.13.92 statistics:
tar.gz: 22M total
tar.bz2: 16M total

desktop 2.13.92 statistics:
tar.gz: 160M total
tar.bz2: 116M total

platform 2.13.92 statistics:
tar.gz: 50M total
tar.bz2: 37M total

The GNOME 2.13.92 release is available here:

platform sources - http://download.gnome.org/GNOME/platform/2.13/2.13.92/
desktop sources - http://download.gnome.org/GNOME/desktop/2.13/2.13.92/
admin sources - http://download.gnome.org/GNOME/admin/2.13/2.13.92/
bindings sources - http://download.gnome.org/bindings/2.13/2.13.92/

To compile it, you can use GARNOME (will be released soon), or the
jhbuild modulesets available at:

http://download.gnome.org/teams/releng/2.13.92/

TESTING! TESTING! TESTING!
--------------------------

This release is a feature, user interface, and string frozen snapshot
primarily intended for wide public scrutiny before the final GNOME
2.14 release in March. GNOME uses odd minor version numbers to indicate
development status. Please check the 2.13 page for more info:

http://www.gnome.org/start/unstable/

Happy testing!

By "without reasons" I mean...

comments like "I don't have any plans to support this. My view is that any screensaver theme that requires configuration is inherently broken." No reason is given why configuration should be disallowed.

Or "There are no plans to implement this feature. I don't think this feature solves any real problems." Again the bug reporter is dismissed without any reason.

Or "There is no need to have this be configurable." Again: no reason whatsoever.

Or "You might want to ask the mplayer developers to support gnome-screensaver." No reason given why gnome-screensaver should break backward compatibility.

The gist of these comments is basically: "f*ck you luser, we don't have to listen to you".

Note that I'm not demanding, at all, that developers work for me gratis. It's the other way around: my life would have been much easier if gnome-screensaver had not been a part of Gnome (and thus in Ubuntu).

You claim that there's a "quiet majority" in favour of ditching xscreensaver for gnome-screensaver. Can you provide any argument backing that statement up?