Re: Modulesets Reorganization

[Milan Bouchet-Valat <nalimilan club fr>]

Le dimanche 06 juin 2010 à 19:53 +0200, Tomeu Vizoso a écrit :
> 
> Moving bindings modules to the Desktop moduleset won't make them less
> second-class citizens as long as API that is not bindable without
> resorting to language-specific glue code keeps being added to
> Platform.
> 
> Examples of this are GVariant (which affects GSettings) and GDBus, in
> the latter this question was raised on gtk-devel but nobody showed
> interest in how to make the new functionality available to bindings:
> 
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2010-May/msg00136.html
> 
> I don't think the authors of those APIs are to blame for this, because
> they asked for feedback before merging and nobody who cared about
> non-C languages replied.
> 
> It's nice that the release team worries about bindings because lots of
> software is written for GNOME in languages other than C. But today we
> are seeing a disproportion between the people who use bindings and
> those that build them and it worries me a lot. What will happen to
> those applications when old APIs such as GConf are not available any
> more and GSettings is not available to their language?
>
> An action more in accordance with the intention of making bindings a
> first class citizen would be to require new API (with exceptions for
> low level glib stuff) to be bindable by the introspecting bindings,
> and also maybe some thinking into why the bindings landscape is in
> such a mess right now.
While I agree with you case about the importance of bindings, I don't
see why GSettings shouldn't work with bindings. For GNOME Shell, we had
a few issues with g_settings_get_strv() and g_settings_set_strv(),
but the API was quickly improved, and now GObject introspection allows
us to use GSettings from JavaScript via GJS without any flaw.


Regards