Re: 1.3.10 release candidates

[Tor Lillqvist <tml iki fi>]

Hans Breuer writes:
 > But my main concern is still the 'g-lib renaming and DIR emulation'
 > discussed in:
 > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2001-October/msg00021.html
 > where I still think most of my arguments are valid and deserve to
 > be discussed. The axiom 'let's do it like libtool' appears to be
 > a little weak to me.

 > (BTW: the glib renaming broke the circular dependency to the
 >  prebuilt gnu-intl.dll)

Again, remember that we are dealing with *development versions* here,
and minor breakage now and then is expected. Especially on the Windows
platform, where there aren't well established conventions for library
names of common open source software, etc. As there is one convention
used by a tool that the majority of open source developers from Unix
are familiar with, and there are many people who are interested in
cross-compiling from Unix for Win32, why not use that?

 > I would like to here other opinions on the renaming of gtk libs

I think you are flogging a dead horse here. Is it really such a big
deal if the DLL names change while in the development phase, when the
API and naming conventions etc by definition are unstable?

 > and the inclusion of a g_<open|read|rewind|close>dir emulation."

Yes, this might indeed be a good idea (if done like that, with real
functions g_opendir() etc, and *not* like it used to be, with #define
opendir g_win32_opendir etc that were active only on Win32). 

Owen, Tim, others, is it too late to consider wrappers for the dirent
functions for inclusion in GLib (on all platforms)?

--tml