Policy for gdk changes?

Paolo Molaro writes:
 > Well, now we have the win32 port in the source: 

It isn't there "officially" or even in whole, yet, but just on yosh's
and Tim Janik's request, to help discussing the kind of questions you

 > In the win32 dir there are 3 header files:
 > gdk.h, gdktypes.h and gdkprivate.h. I think the changes in
 > the first two are very little, so it's better to merge the changes
 > with #ifdef/#endif in the gdk/ directory.

That was my thoughts, too.

 > Different implementations (the .c files) are fine in their own
 > directory.

Moving the X11 implementation to a separate gdk/x11 (or gdk/X11?)
directory without losing the CVS history of the files apparently
requires some CVS hackery, but I think that would indeed be the most
logical way. The backend-independent header files could stay in the
gdk directory.

 > Are the porters required to
 > read the commit mailing-list and keep up, 

I don't think that's reasonable, the GNOME cvs-commits-list is such
high volume. Perhaps there could be separate lists for glib, gtk+ and

 > A message to this mailing-list could be enough, but I don't know
 > if it would be fair to the porters.

It would be enough for me, at least.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]