Re: GTK+ Website Review - Final Draft

Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> 2008/3/26, Martyn Russell <martyn imendio com>:
>> Alberto Ruiz wrote:
>>> 2008/3/26, Martyn Russell <martyn imendio com>:
>>>> Hi Murray,
>>>> I have to say, first and foremost, I agree with Micke. The language
>>>> bindings are about other languages which are available for use with
>>>> GTK+. This is not GNOME. I really think having a small GNOME foot (or
>>>> another icon) for indication purposes in another column is sufficient
>>>> for this. I think it is a mistake to make the point of showing certain
>>>> bindings as "first class" bindings purely because they are supported by
>>>> GNOME.
>>> Still, we need a way to tell people that some bindings are better than
>>> others:
>>> I would suggest to remove any bindings not supported since 2.6 from the
>> main
>>> list, that would pretty much leave the actively maintained and most
>> popular
>>> Gtk+ bindings on the list (most of those are already on the GNOME
>> binding
>>> set btw). Then we can promote the most popular bindings to the highest
>>> places.
>>> Does this makes sense?
>> Actually, I meant to do that too, but must have forgotten.
>> I agree, we should only show bindings up to the version we support
>> perhaps (is that 2.6 or 2.8? I can't remember).
>> This list is not updated by anyone except us though. The problem is that
>> it will definitely become out of date unless someone actively checks up
>> on all bindings. That is probably also why the bindings on there are
>> mostly out of date for a lot of languages.
> I volunteer myself to do some sort of binding review as long as I can get
> access to update the page. (For example, the Ada bindings supports 2.10already).


Should just be a case of:

  $ svn co svn+ssh://<username>

Then update the page, then:

  $ svn commit -m "Updated foo binding information".

Anyone with access to SVN can do it.

The commit is not instant, the pages are rsyncd so there is a short
delay - which is great if you cock things up :) The delay is about 15
minutes I think.


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