Re: [g-a-devel] Re: gok broken with new libwnck

[Mark McLoughlin <markmc redhat com>]

On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 16:50 +0000, Bill Haneman wrote:
> We still have the problem that we are 6 days from code freeze with a 
> change in API which we depend on.  So the solution proposed below 
> (re-implementing the libwnck calls) is not a runner for us.

	Elijah's suggestion to implement your own versions of the libwnck calls
is just a suggestion for you to protect yourself against future libwnck
API changes.

	If you can't do that before the code freeze, I'm sure you can easily
adapt to the new APIs in that time. My understanding is that passing
gtk_get_current_event_time() for the timestamp argument will do exactly
what the API did before, but not what you want it to do under certain
circumstances.

	i.e. the change has happened, you're going to have to deal with it. I
don't think this was neccessarily went against any policy, because we
don't have any policy on this other than "libwnck can change its API at
any time". I do think, though, that we should have a better policy than
that - e.g. that unstable APIs should remain frozen from API freeze time
until the next development cycle.

Cheers,
Mark.