Re: GNOME ABI review

[Chipzz <chipzz ULYSSIS Org>]

On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Jody Goldberg wrote:

> From: Jody Goldberg <jody gnome org>
> Subject: Re: GNOME ABI review
>
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 12:38:45PM -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> >
> > 4. Speed and small size.
> >
> >    Every GNOME app is currently paying for libgnomecanvas, though
> >    basically none of them use it.
>
> I'd add libbonobo and libonoboui to that list.  While Bonobo is an
> interesting and useful technology in spots, I don't see it belonging
> at the core of the gnome libraries.  By forcing it below libgnome*
> for gnome2 people are required to support a gtk+ only build if they
> want to have a win32 port.

I'll second that notion - having half of the platform depend on
libbonoboui just because some other library depends on one/some features
of libbonoboui, even while the app in question does not depend on it, is
a bad thing. I experienced this while trying to compile for the frame-
buffer, and it's a real shame how quickly I got stuck.

OTOH, this is being worked on with the new Gtk+ Toolbar/Menu API.

What needs to be done is the following IMHO:
* Move more widgets, in particular from gal and libeel, lower in the
  dependency-chain and/or incorporate the extensions to the standard
  widgets in those libraries in the lower level libs like Gtk+.
* Add more common stuff to some new/existing libraries. If I'm not mis-
  taken we do not have a standard dock widget (or is that in
  libbonoboui)? Feels like something we should have in Gtk+.

kr,

Chipzz AKA
Jan Van Buggenhout
-- 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 UNIX isn't dead - It just smells funny
                           Chipzz ULYSSIS Org
------------------------------------------------------------------------