RE: gtkhtml

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

One more thought on this.

For people who don't understand that upward dependacies are
bad consider X. In the eariler days (sorry to sound pretencious)
we had X, on top of that Xt on top of that Motif. The model was
something like the left side and under gnome we get the right side.

      *----------------*
      |    apps        |
      |       *--------*
      |       | motif  |  <- Gnome
      |    *--*--------*
      |    |   XT      |  <- gtk
      *----*-----------*
      |       X        |  <- still X
      *----------------*

Imagine if the earlier programmer had built a dependacy such that
X-windows dependended on Motif????

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Kordik [mailto:stevek@voila.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 1:26 PM
> To: gnome-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: gtkhtml
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 18:30:04 +0200, Christian Schaller said:
> 
> > Ok,
> >  Things like this really bugs me, how many machines out there have
> >  gdkpixbuf and
> >  libart installed, but not gnome-libs? Very, very few is my 
> estimate.
> 
> gdk-pixbuf is being rolled into Gtk 1.4 (as it should be) and 
> lib-art is
> available as a seperate entity.  No GNOME required for either of them.
>   
> >  Of all potential and current CSC/Pronto users how many of them will
> >  use GNOME
> >  or have GNOME installed? A very large perctange is my estimate.
> 
> Very few is my estimate (based on discussions with my users on
> cscmail-user@lists.sourceforge.net)
> 
> >  In other words, all the that this really brings is getting 
> 95% of the
> >  CSCMail/Pronto's userbase to waste their diskspace in order to
> >  statisfy some
> >  weird phobia against libs with the name GNOME in them for 
> the last 5%.
> >  Fantastic.
> 
> No, actually, 95% of my users consider GNOME a waste of disk 
> space, and
> so refuse to install GtkHTML.  These users have then had to 
> suffer with
> the lesser widget "XmHTML" which as we all know is dead.  I support it
> anyway to keep my non-GNOME using users happy.	 Now, 
> they get all the
> benefits (and then some) of GtkHTML, without the GNOME bloat.
> 
> >  This reminds me a bit of Gimp which also have talked about 
> wanting to
> >  use 6-7
> >  of the GNOME libraries in their next version, but in order to keep
> >  their GNOME
> >  dependancy low, GNOME libs will not be one of them.
> 
> Good.  I am glad to know that the Gimp people are smart enough to
> understand that GNOME is not a set of widgets, but is instead 
> SUPPOSED to
> be a set of guidelines for creating consistant applications.
> 
> >  Who the hell are 'all' these people who have all these gtk 
> and GNOME
> >  support
> >  libraries installed and who gladly will install 50 others 
> as long as
> >  there is
> >  no GNOME dependency, yet who think GNOME libs will take up 
> to much of
> >  their
> >  precious disk space.
> 
> It's not all about disk space.	In fact, all of my 
> users who previously
> used GtkHTML with CSCMail have now switched to CscHTML.  Why? Because
> CscHTML renders FASTER than GtkHTML.  I hardly believe it myself.  But
> not linking with the GNOME libs made it noticably faster.  
> Sounds like a
> win-win situation to me.  You get a faster widget, and fewer
> dependancies.
> 
> >  Just me wondering and feeling a bit sarcastic
> >  Christian
> 
> Thanks for your input.	Feel free to contact me at any time with
> questions or comments about CscHTML.. I will have a mailing list setup
> soon.  I plan on being RESPONSIVE to my users, just as I am 
> with my other
> project (CSCMail)
> 
> -Count Zero
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-list mailing list
> gnome-list@gnome.org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-list
>