Re: gtk+3 (was: [IMPORTANT] How much time are you planing to spend on Sawfish 3.0)

[Teika Kazura <teika lavabit com>]

Hi. I approve that it should be that gtk3 is an option, not a switch
now. Is it easy to support both 2 and 3, Chris?

It may be obvious, but
* many apps rely on gtk+2, so it won't die immediately. In gentoo
  Linux for example, gtk+1 is still available.
* Is gtk+3 API design stable enough? If the upstream causes a flood of
  changes, it'll be a waste.
* When will distros and other apps support gtk+3? Not soon, so I don't
  feel like pulling in large dependency tree for gtk+3, only for
  Sawfish.
* If our kind people don't feel like using the latest Sawfish, then it
  slows down the development.

But I thank Chris. It is not a preferred task, and requires skills,
but if gtk+2 dies sometime in the future, then who'll do it?

On the other hand, rep-gtk is only used by Sawfish, so I'm afraid it
might be too much to make rep-gtk support all widgets of gtk. Only
needed are sufficient, no? (It's really unlikely, but if a saviour
comes, and gives us a Sawfish re-implemented in some other good Lisp,
then rep-gtk is not necessary.)

With best regards,
Teika (Teika kazura)