Re: GNOME 2.11/2.12 targeting GTK+ 2.8 (ie cairo based)

[Paul Drain <pd cipherfunk org>]

On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 12:29 +0100, Andrew Sobala wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 12:10 +0100, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
> >   It has not been tested it was too soon to test.  Why are people so
> > afraid of gtk+ 2.7 without even trying it?  It really is quite stable
> > now.
> 
> I think it's because in these enlightened times, people use the GNOME
> stack that comes out of jhbuild or Ubuntu Breezy. Both of these
> distribution methods are semi-official; jhbuild is meant to have "The
> next version of GNOME", Breezy is "The next version of Ubuntu", and
> switching to 2.7 for a trial period *without* having this conversation
> is ugly and liable to confuse people about what was actually decided.

Actually, quite a few people still test these things on a wide variety
of platforms with GARNOME too ... most of whom are willing to test all
sorts of absurdity that i'm willing to throw at them during the early
part of an unstable release cycle (if 2.7.x and 2.9.x were anything to
go by).

Only problem is, a lot of them get quite miffed if things don't start
becoming stable by the time we get to .90 or so.

In 2.9.x, we ran across a problem where building parts of desktop
required a new libbonobo{ui} release, or a significant patch against the
released tarball of the time to get running ... quite a few dedicated
testers jumped ship in the gap between the time I had time to put
together and test such a patch after it had become clear that such a
release wasn't going to happen within an acceptable timeframe.

I'd hate to see the same thing happen in 2.11 with GTK+, all very well
to depend on something when there are tarballs for such things appearing
regularly -- but I don't particularly want to go through a whole lot of
bugs that are answered in the form of:

'Fixed in CVS'

For which, GARNOME has no fit solution.

Regards,

Paul