RE: gtkhtml

["Poletti, Don" <don poletti comverse-in com>]

Steve,

I'm with you on this one.

I haven't doen enough to know if this is a viable solution
or if I'm talking through my hat.

Can't it be coded with inheritance? make a gtkhtml that has
no gnome dependancy and the make a gnomehtml widget/class
that adds the gconf, gnome print etc??? IF this is possible
then to me it a no-brainer. you place code where it belongs
and you don't create bad dependacies. If you do promote the
code up the dependacy tree (i.e. gtkhtml->gnomehtml)

I know gtk/gnome is in "C" not C++ but there is an
inheritance system.

This issue worries me. When helix code was first announce its
was said to be seperate from gnome but that gnome would 
beneifit. But this topic sounds like helix is putting their
needs ahead of what is good for gnome. (I bet I just made some 
enemies). Now having said that this is based on what Stephen
has said and I haven't heard the otherside of the story so
I'm open minded that I'm wrong just stating what I see for
discussion. 

And please no comments like "if you don't like 
don't use it" or "there coding it its theirs to do with". There
is some truth to those statements but open source if for 
everyone and those type of comments are the basic we only
want to hear good comment and lead to an army of "yes" men.




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Kordik [mailto:stevek@voila.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 1:24 PM
> To: gnome-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: gtkhtml
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, 28 Jun 2000 11:47:35 +0300, Ali Abdin said:
> 
> >  Prolly because gtkhtml is still in a heavy developmental stage.
> 
> And has been for nearly a year now.  I got tired of waiting.  
> Especially
> since the "heavy development" that is currently going on has 
> nothing to
> do with rendering HTML.  In fact, the HTML rendering code has changed
> little since 0.2... All of the current development is bonobo/gconf
> related.  Now tell me, (at the risk of starting a flame war) 
> why should a
> widget ... A WIDGET... require gconf?  GConf is a cool idea.. I even
> looked at it for CSCMail. It is a nice configuration 
> mechanism.  Widgets
> don't have config files.  They get supplied their configuration by the
> application that uses the widget... Anyway, although it may not win me
> any friends (and certainly didn't in #gnome) I have often raised these
> kinds of questions to the Helix folks, and have been told pretty much
> point-blank that GtkHTML is going to be GNOME through and through,
> because they are only devloping it for its use in Evolution.  
> I mentioned
> rendering issues, and was told that it was "good enough" to be used to
> render e-mail for evolution, so they where not concerned 
> about changing
> any thing.  This proved to me that the current developers of GtkHTML
> where no longer interested in creating a "lightweight HTML rendering
> widget" but where instead just creating the HTML-mail viewer for
> Evolution.  Fine.. that is their choice.  I happen to be in need of a
> good lightweight HTML renderer for my project.
> So I took the good parts of GtkHTML and dropped the bad...  Turns out
> CscHTML is faster, and I am already adding rendering features (support
> for the <font face=> tag went in this weekend) and have plans 
> to expand
> it even further.
> 
> >  Anyway regardless - If I was in that position, I would 
> have created a 
> >  patch anyway and distribute instead of forking the whole thing.
> 
> So now you get to maintain your patch.	You get to 
> download GtkHTML and
> keep up with all the changes that they make to make sure that 
> your patch
> keeps pace with them.  But you don't get to say anything about their
> development, so you are always playing catch up.  Sounds like 
> a full time
> job to me.  Might as well just fork the whole thing.. At 
> least this way
> you get to work at your own pace, and don't have to worry about their
> latest version breaking your patch.
> 
> > that way you get the fixes/updates from 
> >  gtkhtml, and you get the application to do what you want.
> 
> Fact is, I don't WANT the fixes/updates that have been coming into
> GtkHTML recently.  It's all GNOME/Evolution centric.  None of 
> the last 6
> months worth of code has anything to do with an HTML widget.  
> (I compared
> 0.2 to 0.4 when I started my fork.  I nearly forked 0.2 just 
> because it
> was functionaly the same widget... HTML rendering wise.)
> 
> 
> Anyway, I am probably coming off like an angry child, and not 
> winning any
> friends.  I hope thats not the case.  I believe that CSCMail 
> is the only
> stable, full featured application that USES GtkHTML.  
> (Evolution doesn't
> count since it doesn't work yet)  People browse the web with 
> CSCBrowser
> (masochists... I don't understand it either) and people read 
> their mail
> with CSCMail (using GtkHTML to render it)  So, maybe I tend 
> to take it a
> lil personal when my questions and suggestions get ignored 
> for months on
> end.  I try really hard not to.  But after my chat with 
> Miguel in #gnome
> a few weeks ago, it was quite clear to me that GtkHTML was no longer
> being developed as a generic HTML widget, but was instead wholey
> Evolution centric. No surprise there really... The coders for 
> GtkHTML all
> work for Helix, and Evolution is Helix's #1 project right 
> now.	I wish
> them the best.. CscHTML is being developed for use in ANY gtk 
> application
> that wants it, not just to link with MY program.
> 
> My ultimate dream?  Maybe someday CscHTML will get rolled into Gtk
> proper... Wow.. wouldn't that be cool?
> 
> -Count Zero
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-list mailing list
> gnome-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
>