Re: gtk 2.8 for gnome 2.12

[Elijah Newren <newren gmail com>]

On 7/21/05, Miguel de Icaza <miguel ximian com> wrote:
> 
> For how long has the QA team been running a Gtk 2.7.3 based desktop?
> And what kinds of tests have been done?  I mean to get an idea of the
> testing happening in this area that lead to this very strong
> endorsement.
> 
> We know that the testing at most has been running for six days.

No, you don't.  You asserted it.  And it happens to be false.  ;-)

> It is pretty bold to state that six days (max) of testing has produced a
> Gtk 2.7 that is as stable as 2.6;   Lets not forget that after 2.6.0 was
> released, bug fixes were applied for six months after that.

It would be bold to make a claim on such a basis, but that was not the
basis.  We've been testing since switching from 2.10.  Also, "gets bug
fixes" is not a measure of "is stable"; it's a measure of "is
maintained".

> This is a breach of the time-line and a breach of deadlines that we have
> imposed upon ourselves to follow.

We can't stick to a plan that doesn't exist.  As pointed out by
others, Gtk+ 2.6 with Gnome 2.12 was _never_ planned.  Yes, gtk+-2.6
for Gnome 2.12 was discussed as a contingency plan, and some wanted to
make it the plan, but that is it.

> No matter how well intentioned our developers are with a change in scope
> and size of this dimension Gtk 2.7 which has only been out for a month
> is bound to have problems.

Then you shouldn't have a hard time finding some and pointing them
out.  Or getting someone to do so.  Others felt the same way (e.g.
Luis in particular) and changed their mind after investigating the
matter.

> You of all people should know this.   I do not run Gtk 2.7 nor work on
> the group that works on that, but that does not disqualify me from
> pointing out what has been a constant in the last 50 years of software
> development.  I do not see how Gtk 2.7 can break away from the physics
> of software development.

This was discussed in multiple threads over the last two months.  Luis
was one of the major objectors about our using gtk+-2.8 and his
reasoning was exactly what you list above.  He changed his mind after
testing, working through bug reports, polling others, etc., etc.

> No company would bet its future on something like this with proper
> testing (which seems to have been decided by a few folks on irc).

Nope, another incorrect assertion; it was decided on d-d-l.  Also, the
gtk+ developers don't release 2.8.0 until it's stable.  Releasing
2.8.0 is their way of saying it is stable.  Now, you want to come in
months after the discussions and final decision, and say that the gtk+
developers are not competent to determine stability of their product
and that the release team and QA teams were also wrong in their
judgement of whether to use it?  Gee, thanks.

Elijah