Re: gshell

[Dietmar Maurer <dietmar ximian com>]

Lutz Mueller wrote:

> On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Dietmar Maurer wrote:
>
> > Lutz Mueller wrote:
> >
> > > (2) I'd really like to move some code around. The naming of objects, files
> > > and functions is a mess. If gshell would be independent of bonobo, it
> > > would be much easier to do those changes (I wouldn't have to bother this
> > > list with rather huge patches...). Why is gshell in bonobo?
> >
> > Maybe you can port the whole thing to Gnome 2? I think the appropriate place
> > would then be the bonobo-extra module.
>
> Gnome 2 - sure. bonobo-extra-module? I don't know. For me, gshell is a
> stand-alone program that uses components from all over the place (gtkhtml,
> eog, ...). I'd rather distribute it independently from any other package.
> But this is up to you to decide. Just tell me how I can work on
> gshell.

Right now gshell is used to test components, and that is the reason why it is
part of bonobo. If you extend gshell and make it a full featured MDI shell other
application will depend on it (although its a runtime dependency). Thus I see no
reason why we should make an extra CVS module. Instead it should be installed
together with the basic bonobo infrastructure. Sure, we can make it an extra
module if the project gets to large (it is quite small at the moment).

You also said that you "wouldn't have to bother this list with rather huge
patches". Well, you don't bother anyone if you send patches. Instead we see what
you are doing and we can also make suggestion. Getting some feedback is always a
good thing.

But I would be glad if you put some work into gshell. I still think that
bonobo-extra is the right place, so I would suggest that someone with an account
on the gnome CVS server copies the gshell files into bonobo-extra (to preserve
the CVS history). Lutz can then start to port it to Gnome 2 and add some nice
features ;-)

Any objections to that approach?

- Dietmar