I'm in the midst of porting gnucash from gtk1/gnome1 to the gtk2 libraries set. We're currently targeting the gtk2.2 platform for the port, but we're also using a couple of things from libegg, including the actions and menu-merge code. I noticed that Matthias recently committed this to the gtk sources as gtkuimanager.c with a completely different menu description language. I'm trying to decide whether to to continue working with the libegg versions of this code and miss out on the bug fixes in the gtk versions, or whether to rip the libegg code from gnucash and put in the gtk2.4 versions of these modules. Does anyone have an idea of how hard it would be to compile these files separate from the main gtk sources? As I see it: Pros: 1) using the "current" code for uimanager (aka menumerge) and actions. 2) menu descriptions don't have to be rewritten/converted when gnucash moves to a gtk2.4 base from a gtk2.2 base 3) code doesn't have to be rewritten from egg-xxx to gtk-xxx when gnucash moves to a gtk2.4 base from a gtk2.2 base 4) don't have to produce two sets of bug fixes to send upstream (are the egg versions considered end-of-life at this point?) Cons: 1) Don't know if code can be extracted from gtk2.4 and compiled on 2.2 2) Confusion whether a gtk_xxx call in gnucash goes to a local gnucash library or to the real gtk libraries in /usr/lib. Comments? Suggestions? Ideas? David
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part