RE: Trivial patches on b.g.o covers dust.

[Ali Akcaagac <aliakc web de>]

On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 21:07, Owen Taylor wrote:
> > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106336

>  3) Simple patches that have non-obvious side-effects and take
>     some consideration.
> 
> I try to get to patches in roughly the order above.
> 
> There are several reasons why this fits into 3):
> 
>  - The change for the drawing is clearly correct; and I want
>    to put it into HEAD. However, some people consider it to make
>    things _worse_ since it makes the case of drawing double bevels
>    more obvious. So, it's not clear if it should go into stable.
>  
>  - Any change to default values for properties or style properties 
>    is minor incompatible API breakage, so a) takes careful consideration
>    b) Cannot be done on stable.
> 
>  - There is a big toolbar change coming with the integration of
>    EggToolbar. It's just a waste to spend time doing small fiddling with
>    GtkToolbar in HEAD prior to pulling a much modified version
>    of the toolbar to libegg which would overwrite those changes.

Thank you for your feedback. Well I do agree that breaking things needs
a lot of careful thoughts but you need to value what matters more doing
a little API breakage which probably no one ever notices or still
dealing with an esthetical ugly looking Toolbar. But I pretty much
appreciate that you still consider this to go into CVS. Yes the LibEGG
Toolbar is indeed a nice thing but seriously how long do you think until
it makes into GTK+ 6 months ? 8 months ? 10 months ? Meanwhile we could
profit from the dobey patches. If the Toolbar get's replaced anyways
then this is another good reason to vote for this 'temporary' solution.
Things seriously look so what better with these 2 lines changed.

greets, Ali Akcaagac.