Re: GConf and bonobo-config - some ideas

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

Elliot Lee <sopwith redhat com> writes:
> . Everyone needs to to reaffirm their committment to Bonobo as the
> component/document model for GNOME 2, because the feeling by the Bonobo
> hackers is that many people are not on board with their efforts.

I hereby reaffirm that Bonobo is a key part of GNOME 2.

The only caveat I'd add is this: GtkObject is deprecated. However,
going through all code and porting it to GObject instead is a Bad Idea
- it's just a waste of time with no meaningful benefit. I would
typically wait until you're revising/replacing a chunk of code anyway,
then port to GObject at that time.

Similarly for Bonobo, and gnome-libs changes. I would really like to
see a focus on deploying some excellent end-user features such as key
navigation and various UI tweaks that have been discussed. Also things
like Nautilus performance enhancement.

This is not an anti-Bonobo thing or a vote of confidence for
GnomeColorPicker, simply an observation about limited time to do GNOME
2, and my personal priorities. GnomeColorPicker isn't hurting anything
for now. I don't see an urgent need to port Gnomine to the Bonobo menu
API, etc. - basically, don't break stuff that's working fine, wait
until you're cleaning it up anyhow for some other reason.

The compromise we reached for this at GUADEC was to finish with the
libs by end of July, and that's a good compromise. So I'm going along
with that (though I would have done far less library work if I were 
making the decision).

Anyhow, anyway, any observed lack of enthusiasm for library work on my
part is stemming from this, not hostility to Bonobo.

Havoc