Re: gnome-terminal awfully slow

[Bill Haneman <bill haneman sun com>]

On Wed, 2003-02-12 at 21:10, Hidetoshi Tajima wrote:
> Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 08:09:07PM +0000, Bill Haneman wrote: 
> >   
> > > Is VTE a compile-time option?  If so then I am concerned since we
> > > haven't been able to verify the accessibility of VTE yet (at last check,
> > > it failed to emit necessary events when text content or text caret
> > > changed).
> > > 
> > > Of course it might be working but I think we should be very cautious
> > > about swapping out components at build time (as opposed to
> > > user-selectable runtime options) if we haven't yet verified their
> > > accessibility.
> > >     
> > 
> > Zvt is dead, I'm going to delete all support for it from HEAD.  vte is
> > a compile-time option in 2.2.
> >   
> I'd support Havoc. Zvt development has been completely dead for months
> - no chance to be alive again 
> when vte's development is fearly active. I have a reason to judge
> so:-)

This isn't about performance, it's about accessibility.

The fact that vte was compiled into 2.2 was *not* highlighted in the
runup to 2.2.  I think it's quite possible that our terminal
accessibility has considerably regressed from 2.0, and that's not good.

:-(

Such things really, truly need to be explicitly called out if we are to
have any chance of creating a usably accessible desktop.  I realize that
this info is probably buried in d-d-list somewhere but us accessibility
folks warned repeatedly against making vte the default gnome-terminal
widget until verification could take place.  If RT/d-d-l was determined
to make the swap regardless, then we really should have been given an
explicit heads-up at that time.

-Bill


-- 
Bill Haneman <bill haneman sun com>