Re: gtk 2.8 for gnome 2.12

[JP Rosevear <jpr novell com>]

On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 23:42 +0100, Andrew Sobala wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 17:20 -0400, JP Rosevear wrote:
> > There could or could not be significant issues in 2.7.  The point is its
> > not certain and it introduces significant *risk* to the schedule.  We
> > went through the same thing with 2.6 and it seems we learned nothing,
> > see your own original view:
> > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2005-June/msg00020.html
> > 
> > As well as Andrew's:
> > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2005-June/msg00022.html
> 
> Just for reference, the main differences between 2.6 and 2.8 are their
> stability and completeness *at this point* in the release cycle - ie.
> the point at which we are committing to one. 2.8 appears to be more
> stable and complete than 2.6 was.

So, gtk 2.6.0 was released Dec 16/2004, approximately 3 months before
the GNOME release.  It is 2 months until the next GNOME release.  No
stable (meaning blessed by gtk maintainers release) gtk has been
released.  The original concern above was:

"Oh, and after the last time we did this, the release team swore mighty
oaths to never depend on a released-close-to-gnome-schedule GTK again,
since it jeopardizes our release schedule for something that is less
tested than the rest of the stack and which in many cases isn't widely
used because developers haven't had time to integrate it."

This seems to be a near identical situation.

Nothing stops distro's from shipping 2.8 if they feel its ready either.
But forcing a dependency on it seems risky (again, gtk 2.7 could be
perfectly fine, but to say it doesn't introduce additional risk seems
erroneous).

-JP
-- 
JP Rosevear <jpr novell com>
Novell, Inc.