"To infinity and beyond", so began my question on how much longer the Gnome 2.x branch would continue and if Gnome 3.0 could be seen anywhere on the horizon.
(This post is about the Gnome Desktop Enviroment and if you don't know what it is you probably will not find the rest of this post interesting.)
The results were predictable enough. One developer was bluntly honest and admitted he would not mind at all if the Gnome 2.x branch continued on indefinately. It may seem silly to outsiders to have Gnome 2.x continue on for years and years but developers seem fine with that. Others continued with the "not yet" and "maybe later" comments, and help to further build up expectations that Gnome 3.0 will be some wonderous utopia but with no idea of when it might happen. A few people agreed with my sentiment and helped explain all software development is incremental in a well managed project and there should not need to be any radical changes all at once. Next time someone asks about Gnome 3.0 the answer will probably still be there is more work to be done.
No sooner than I say Gnome 3.0 will not happen based on the lack of any plan or timeframe, I fully expect someone will tell me it is going to happen and how I shouldn't use the dearth of evidence as counterevidence or proof by contradiction. To play it a little safer Gnome 3.0 will not happen out of nowhere and I can at least say Gnome 2.16 is planned for certain. Next year Gnome 2.18 and 2.20 are likely to usher in Ten Years of Gnome. Project Ridley and the arrival of GTK 3.0 will probably be the cause the for Gnome 3.0 to be brought up again but I don't plan on being the one to float the idea.
The Gnome 3.0 discussion was tapering off I was amused by Elijah Newren making a cheeky comment on how Gnome was correct and Jeff Waugh was incorectly typing it in all uppercase as GNOME. I should have resisted but couldn't help but adding a comment about Uppercase Gnome of my own, which was quoted on and syndicated on Planet Gnome. (Pedantic: The background image reads "planet gnome" (sic) an execption to the otherwise consistent use of GNOME.) Since I was already being berated for my suggestion of Gnome 3.0 a little extra criticism for discussing this old chestnut wasn't going to make much of a difference. As usual not everyone realised the silliness of the discussion and one person kindly explained GNOME was an acronym but failing to realise how contrived it was. The silliness continued but some interesting points were made, inlcuding how gnome-binaries are lowercase, Miguel de Icaza writes Gnome, and most interestingly how Gnome capitalisation had all been discussed six years ago by the Gnome documentation project. Patrick Costello wrote an especially lucid explanation of why Gnome should be lowercase. I'm not sure if he was trying to be funny and describe Gnome developers but I especially enjoyed the comment:
The desktop is deliberately associated with small, hairy proto-men of indeterminate age and habitswhich is nearly as funny as the Uncyclopedia explanation of the Gnome footprint:
Gnome's logo is a huge footprint, but it is not clearly established whether it is a huge memory footprint or a huge disk footprint.
Between GNOME 3.0 and Gnome capitalisation it has been an unproductive but amusing discussion. I do hope people see the funny side of it but more importantly and all silliness aside I do hope both the proposed changes can come to pass sometime in the future. (Comments)