Re: My vision of gnome-libs (was Re: GNOME 2.0 meeting summary)

[George <jirka 5z com>]

On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 11:35:29PM -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> <pedantic>You could simply not use those widgets. ;-) </pedantic>
> 
> Though I don't think that's entirely a silly thing to say. If a widget
> needs a full rewrite and is totally broken, why are you using it?
> Put a replacement someplace and use that. There's not a rule that to
> use a widget it must be in libgnomeui.

Well, this is stuff like GnomeApp or similar, not exactly say, GnomeHRef ...
Plus people expect things in libgnomeui to work.  And they will spend time on
trying to make them work because of this expectation, and they may finally
get pissed, cut-n-paste and fix it in their tree.  And that's what I want to
avoid.

> If they are fine but need VFS support, then OK let's just put in the
> VFS support quickly, should be considered a cleanup. If they need a
> big rewrite, just leave the old ones alone and do GnomeSelector and
> subclasses as a separate thing and don't break apps using the old
> ones. i.e. do the GtkList/GtkCList/GtkTreeView thing. If you think
> CList is bad imagine it implemented on top of GtkList. ;-)

One could argue anything using the old ones is broken and this includes other
widgets in libgnomeui that use those widgets.  try changing icons for your
panel launchers, it can get hairy (especially if you ... gasp, use the cancel
button).  So it's not just adding gnome-vfs, it's their general brokenness.

Basically I don't want to have those widgets in GnomeLibs 2 at all.  But
anyway.  I think we do agree on the general idea here.

George

-- 
George <jirka 5z com>
   Miau miau, zikala kocicka dyz hapala do studne.
                       -- Hyta a Batul

_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers