Re: 2.3 Proposed Features

On Tue, 2003-02-04 at 01:32, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 12:08:53AM -0500, Ettore Perazzoli wrote:
> > Why are we assuming that it's more likely for GNOME to be out on time
> > than for GTK?  Is there a specific reason why the GTK release cycle has
> > to be longer?
> I guess I just don't buy that GTK 2.4 with its current feature plan
> will be releasable in time to still get GNOME out on a good
> schedule. If we dropped the menu/toolbar stuff and the combo stuff
> maybe. Those two are big, hard, and controversial.  If we do only the
> filesel plus small stuff I am willing to believe we could do GTK 2.4
> early enough that GNOME 2.4 could use it.

The discussion seemed to assume that the GTK 2.4 feature plan was set in
stone, that's why I was asking if the GTK release cycle couldn't just be
made shorter.

My point was just that I'd rather have a shorter GTK release cycle which
helps fixing important issues in GNOME rather than have a half-assed
solution in GNOME waiting for GTK to fix the issue.

> I would feel more comfortable relying on GTK if Owen had a minion or
> two. Right now the only "generalists" that regularly do arbitrary GTK
> work are Owen and Matthias Clasen. If Owen has to take a week to fix
> gdm bugs for Red Hat Linux, then the GTK schedule is pushed out a
> week. There's no one else to pick it up. With the large number of
> people working on GNOME, individual distractions tend to average out a
> bit more.

I understand that, and that's a known problem with GTK.  This doesn't
mean it cannot be fixed though; hopefully other GNOME developers can
help with GTK development as well.

> Yes this means apps using the prototype get extra work porting to the
> final API, but what are you going to do about it. It seems inherent in
> the concept of trying something out that you may decide you don't like
> it. And that's what a prototype is.
> The mistake is putting prototypes somewhere we can't get rid of them,
> like libgnomeui.

I don't understand this objection. I am *not* advocating putting a
prototype in libgnomeui.  I am advocating putting a *finalized* API in
either libgnomeui or gtk.  But I'd like it to be in 2.4, not in some
undefined timeframe after 2.4.

Ettore Perazzoli <ettore ximian com>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]