Re: Animator widget

[Matt Aubury <matt ookypooky com>]

On 05 Jul 2001 19:16:39 +0200, Martin Baulig wrote:
> Matt Aubury <matt ookypooky com> writes:
> 
> > Mmm, perhaps I've misunderstood horribly then. We're _not_ already using
> > the GNOME 2.0 API (that would be daft) and don't expect to in the near
> > future. But I would expect that (at some future point) I could compile
> > our current source against the Gnome 2.0 compatiblity libraries and have
> > it work just the same as against the main Gnome 1.4 libraries. If this
> > isn't the point of libcompat, then I've missed something completely...
> > (what then is the point?)
> 
> I'm a bit in a hurry at the moment, so I'll explain it in more detail
> tomorrow. Basically libcompat is to help people porting their code to GNOME 2,
> but to make GNOME 1.x code compile nicely on the GNOME 2 platform. libcompat
> will contain things which are either heavily used all over GNOME or which are
> really hard to rewrite (for instance GnomeApp etc.).
> 
> If something which has been removed in GNOME 2 is only used in one or two
> applications, then it's better to move the compat implementation into this app
> rather than putting it into libcompat.

Ah okay, well then that makes things a lot clearer, and I can understand
the motivation for this. I do tend to think that things should be
deprecated for at least one revision of the platform before being
removed completely (with appropriate notices in headers, warnings at
compile time and at runtime), but that's just a personal preference. I
presume the plan for running 1.4 apps under 2.0 is just to keep both
sets of libraries on the user's system? (much like 2.0 developers do
now?)

Cheers,
MattA