Re: About compatibility in GNOME 2 (was Re: Compatibility stuff)
- From: Michael Meeks <michael ximian com>
- To: Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>
- Cc: Martin Baulig <martin home-of-linux org>, Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>, gnome-hackers gnome org, gtk-devel-list gnome org, Daniel Veillard <Daniel Veillard w3 org>
- Subject: Re: About compatibility in GNOME 2 (was Re: Compatibility stuff)
- Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 19:33:37 -0500 (EST)
On 9 Mar 2001, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > Well, the problem I see here is when development goes on in the
> > stable branch and only a few people are using HEAD. Then it'll be a
> > huge pain to have a large number of changes.
>
> But that situation is only going to last until the end of the month.
> Anyone who won't branch once 1.4 goes out deserves untold flameage
> brought down from the heavens. Don't worry about it.
Whilst initialy disagreeing with Martin, and loathing hacks like:
#define GTK_OBJECT_TYPE G_OBJECT_TYPE
I think he is quite right that it can only be a good thing to
improve source compatibility between versions. It allows people to start
preparing applications for porting to Gtk+ 2.0 before Gtk+ 2.0 is fully
frozen. It also allows GNOME applications people actualy use [1] to move
towards Gtk+ 2.0 more quickly - which has to be good.
I havn't seen exactly the full scope of what Martin proposes for
some reason, but it seems remarkably similar to the good job Daniel did
with source compatibility between libxml1 and 2. I think Daneil's work
there will have, and has had a very positive effect in preparing and
transitioning code to libxml2.
I'd also be quite happy to have lots of mechanical seds removed
from my diffs between a stable version I have to maintain and any other
branch.
Just an API user's view,
Michael.
[1] - which will want to stick with the Gnome 1.4 libraries until Gnome
2.0 is near frozen,
--
mmeeks gnu org <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]