Re: Qt Vs Cairo performance comparison

[Rob Taylor <rob taylor collabora co uk>]

Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 13:02 -0500, Sean Kelley wrote:
>> I do worry about existing indefinitely on Gtk+ 2.8 and others on Gtk+
>> 2.6 as patches are submitted (fixed point) and changes proposed, but
>> no action taken.  So our recourse is to maintain those patches in our
>> Subversion repositories and pick and choose what works.
> 
> I share your pain.  I have a bunch of patches in Novell's package for
> Nautilus and Gnome-VFS, that are not upstream, even though they were
> sent for review a long time ago.  The maintainers have very good reasons
> for not taking the patches as they are.  But *they* will not fix
> *Novell's* problems.  *I* have to fix Novell's problems; that's why they
> pay me.  I expect you to do the same for the problems in the embedded
> platform space in GTK+.
> 

I'm a little confused about what you actually mean here! Do you mean we
should expect to have to maintain large patch sets for embedded
platforms? I guess a gtk+-embedded branch would make some sense in that
case as there are a number of players working in this area.
I don't think any of the embedded people want gtk+ maintainers to do
their work, but they do want somewhere where they can work together, and
 it seems at this moment, mainline isn't this - which is of course
ideally what everyone wants.

Thanks,
Rob Taylor