Re: Minutes of the GTK+ Team Meeting - 2008-09-23

["Brian J. Tarricone" <bjt23 cornell edu>]

Alexander Larsson wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 11:38 -0500, Mike Kestner wrote:
>
> > If the motivation for removing the types is that, "things aren't as
> > beautiful as they could be" then that argument doesn't really outweigh
> > the pain of porting existing code.  Especially when the cost of
> > supporting existing code is so low.  
>
> I think the general problem is that if you have a box type that can
> change orientation on the fly, what type is it? A HBox or a Vbox?

This isn't about new code; this is about supporting old code -- old code 
doesn't try to flip h/vboxes.  If an app developer needs a flippable box 
and is currently using GTK(H|V)Boxes, they're going to switch to the new 
flippable GtkBox.  If not, they probably won't go to the effort to port 
their code to the new API, so there's no change.

Ignoring the deprecation warnings and continuing to use Gtk(H|V)Box, AND 
trying to make them flippable seems like it would be a rare practice, 
and people who try to do that deserve what they get.

	-brian