Re: RFC: split gtk2-perl-xs

On Sat, 2003-04-26 at 07:04, goran kirra net wrote:
1. Wouldn't it easier to maintain if it is split the module?
   Bounderies for the splitting would be beteen wrapping of libraries
   which is indently maintain. User which has not got gnome etc and only 
   needs gtk+ (like windows user) would have to walk truough a
   complicated build process.

the toplevel in gtk2-perl-xs is a hacked-up version of the
one from gtk-perl.  it does some checks to see what you have and what
you don't have, and builds what it can.  in fact, this makes things a
lot easier on the end user.

to break this source package into multiple packages, we'll have to
install (it goes under ExtUtils) and a couple of the
generator scripts.

2. G::<namespace>: I think this would be hard to get accepted in CPAN
   since what G:: reference hardly is clear to people not into Gtk+/Gnome.
   Either we should change it to GLib:: or just move it into Gtk2:: since
   the functionality in GObject et al is not especially useful to
   perlprogrammers outside to Gtk+ context.

i asked this question a couple of weeks ago [1], but there was no
consensus.  some like GLib, others think G is fine, others like Gtk2::G
and others (including me) despise Gtk2::G.

the code changes is insubstantial (just a search&replace), but the
change on the cvs side will be a pain (renaming a directory).  that
said, i don't really care, as long as there's a consensus and the user
is not forced to load Gtk2 just to get to GObject.  (there *is* use for
GObject outside of Gtk for special-purpose things, and i will not break


muppet <scott at asofyet dot org>

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