Re: type patch

Jonathan Blandford <jrb redhat com> writes:

> Hi,
> Currently, a number of types are registered as "GtkTypeFoo" instead of
> simply "GtkFoo".  This problem is explained in greater detail in bug
> #84633.  I have attached a fix that fixes this.  It will probably break
> code like glade and language bindings, so it probably only makes sense
> to commit this to HEAD only.  Of course, these are obviously all wrong,
> so it's tempting to bite the bullet and just try to fix it now.
> Thoughts?

I'm going to go ahead and agree with Tim and say that we should apply
this patch now:

 A) The "GtkTypeBlah" names are just stupid bugs, and pretty obviously  so.
 B) Its not going to have a significant effect on anything to fix them.
 C) If we feel its OK to do for 2.2.x then its also OK to do for 2.0.x;
    the compatibility guarantees are the same. (*)
 D) The longer we wait, the more likely someone will depend on the
    bad names.

B) being the important one.


(*) The main reason we'd want to push something that might break code
    off to 2.2.x is when we don't really have a good idea of the
    expected impact.

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