Re: Adjusting the 2.4 schedule

[Matthias Clasen <maclas gmx de>]

Am Mit, 2003-06-25 um 00.00 schrieb Owen Taylor:

> We seem to have procedural problems at getting from the "close" stage 
> to the "committed" stage for some of these things.
> 
> Mails to gtk-devel-list of the form:
> 
>  - There is a new patch in bugzilla for bug #12345
>  - The issues brought up last time were
>    - A: resolved by ...
>    - B: resolved by ...
>    - C: ignored, because ...
>  - Are we ready to commit? / I'm going to go ahead and 
>    commit in a week if nobody objects. [*]
> 
> Might be a good idea

Ok, there you go...

- There is a new patch in bugzilla for bug #69436 (ARGB cursors)

- The issues brought up last time were

  - Coding style: hopefully fixed.

  - X specific docs: 
    I tried separate each doc comment into a generic paragraph and 
    an X specific one.                  

  - Might be better to use a frame struct instead of parallel arrays:
    I introduced GdkCursorImage for that purpose

  - Might be nice to make the capabilities of the system queryable: 
    I added four gdk_display_*() functions for this purpose
    which closely mirror the corresponding Xcursor interfaces.

  - cursor_by_name would be nice to have: 
    Ignored, because it can be added later.

- Are we ready to commit? / I'm going to go ahead and 
  commit in a week if nobody objects. [*]

Matthias

[*] What was that footnote supposed to contain, Owen :-)