Re: [g-a-devel] RFC: AtkText simplification (take 2)

[Piñeiro <apinheiro igalia com>]

On 06/26/2013 02:40 PM, Mario Sanchez Prada wrote:
> > On 06/24/2013 02:26 PM, Mario Sanchez Prada wrote:
> > > > [...]
> > > > So, taking into account that you are already working on this, I
> > > > assume that you would prefer to add the generic boundary now, in
> > > > order to avoid two updates of the implementation of those APIs.
> > Right?
> Yes, that would be my preference. However, I just realized that the ATK
> version bumped in WebKit has been recently raised to 2.8.0 and so I don't
> think raising it again to 2.10 is something likely to happen in the short
> term, so I'm afraid we'll have to coexist with the old API for a while
> anyway (meaning that I will need to provide implementation for those methods
> anyway in the patches I'm currently working on).

Ok. FWIW, just in case you find it useful, one of the additions for ATK
2.8 was version macros, like the ones that you can find on gtk. Those
would allow you to check current version of ATK. Not sure if it would be
useful here, but it is worth to mention it.

> > Ok, that is not a valid reason for you, but in any case you didn't
> > answer my question. So I will not add the reasons to the question, do
> > you (as one of the atk implementors) prefer to add the generic boundary
> > now (so probably for next ATK release) or not?
> Yes.
>
> Still, as I mention above, we will probably not be able to change WebKitGTK+
> yet to match the new API because raising ATK dependency up to 2.10 will
> probably not be a good idea right now.

Ok

> > > Furthermore, I also think it should not be a big deal to have those
> > > new boundaries co-exist with the old ones as long as it's clearly
> > > stated in the documentation what is deprecated and what is not. Or
> > you
> > > can use some kind of aliases like what Trevor is suggesting.
> > Well, it is just less clear, IMHO, having two enums that means the
> > same.
> I understand your point, but I see it as a temporary evil while we move to
> the new API, and not nothing too severe, since we would not be breaking
> backward compatibility or the like, just preparing for the future.

Ok. FWIW, taking into account the feedback of this thread, I will add
the generic boundary for the next ATK release (still 2.9.X)

Thanks for the feedback

BR

-- 
Alejandro Piñeiro Iglesias