Re: Eog port

[Claudio Saavedra <csaavedra igalia com>]

On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 10:50:37PM +0200, Fabian Sturm wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Am Mittwoch, den 19.10.2011, 11:12 +0300 schrieb Claudio Saavedra:
> 
> > I'm actually talking about the frustration of accepting at some point
> > that the project you started rewriting won't necessarily accept your
> > code.
> 
> Don't worry that's ok, I do not expect anything. Eog will still benefit
> a little bit from my effort, since I already found a few bugs in the C
> code.

Please, report them.

> > > But rewriting anything before thinking exactly what's that the GNOME
> > > > image viewer should be, would probably be a waste of effort.
> 
> Sure but in my opinion I know exactly what it should be. An application
> with a modern programming language which allows changes byt the
> occasional drive by programmer :-)

Sigh. Again, that is *not* enough of a reason for a rewrite of a over
10-year old project. If you want to start your own project with the
only goal of rewriting it in your pet-language, all the good. But I,
for one, am not interested in this. It's a lot of effort and under the
same reasoning, someone will come 2 years from now to say that we
should rewrite eog in $HIPSTER_LANGUAGE. No, thanks.

>  
> > > What I am currently doing is to apply all changes between eog-2.32 and eog-3.2.
> > > After that I'll start the bugfixing once again.
> > 
> > This is exactly one of the reasons why this approach is wrong. By the
> > time you're done, you could eventually need to start applying the
> > changes between 3.2 and HEAD, and so on.
> 
> Yes of course, but that's a problem of any branch. You always have to
> track HEAD. In my case I have to apply quite a bit since I started to
> port 2.32 since I had no gnome3 libraries available at that time.
> But after that is finished I don't expect that it is to hard to track.
> 
> > Please don't take me wrong, but I appreciate your enthusiasm and I
> > would feel much better about it if we could use it in a more
> > productive way.
> 
> Hmm, I have no idea how that should look like sine I will not start
> writing apps in C. There is just no point in it, imho.
> And don't get me wrong, emails are really bad for such type of
> conversations since they don't transport emotions. I really do like all
> the efforts and time you have spend in writing eog!

I'm not telling you to write anything in C. I am just saying, and I
repeat myself, that we can start planning the future UI/architecutre
of eog and then decide if we need a rewite or not, and this makes more
sense to me.

Claudio