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

Am Sun, 23 May 2010 12:49:20 +0200
schrieb Christopher Roy Bratusek <zanghar freenet de>:

> Am Sun, 23 May 2010 16:56:14 +0900 (JST)
> schrieb 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?
> > 

in the c-part it's not difficult, for rep-gtk we may check for the version.

Just to make it clear: we're speaking about an alpha-version, not a stable one.

> > 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?
> Actually GTK+3 is "just" an improved GTK+2, but a majority of widgets beeing used
> in Sawfish is going to be removed, because they are marked deprecated since GTK+
> 2.0.0. Next Sawfish 3.0.0 is *currently* scheduled for June 2010, while GTK+ 3.0.0

err. June 2011.

> is released in September 2010, so we are not that early. Sawfish 3.0.0 is expected
> to also break things, as it's another major version. GTK+2 and 3 and be installed
> at the same time.
> Besides: who said that 1.6x dies immediately when 3.0x entering the alpha-phase? Of
> course testers need GTK+3, but well, you can install Fedora/Ubuntu/Mandriva/SuSE &
> Co. as testdistro (or in VirtualBox), those distros next major release will ship
> GTK+3. And installing GTK+3 manually besides GTK+2 won't include much more than
> GLib3, newer Cairo and Pango, that should be it.
> However keep 3.0.0 at GTK+2 and switching to GTK+3 with 3.2.0 or 3.4.0 doesn't make
> sense.
> > 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.)
> Of course at first only the necessary stuff is implemented.
> > With best regards,
> > Teika (Teika kazura)
> > 


JETZT! Am Kiosk:

Das ComputerBild Linux Spezial!

Unter anderem mit:
	* 100% Startgeschwindkeitsverringerung durch exklusive Tipps!
	* Linux verstehen: Warum frägt es nicht nach dem "Any Key"?
	* 2631 verbotene Konfigurationsoptionen lieblos für Sie zusammenkopiert
	* Linux Guru werden: Wir erstellen ein Skript, dass das Datum ausgibt
	* Flamen für Anfänger: Die Top 20 Mythen über KDE und GNOME
	* Test: Wo kann man sich besser zu Tode konfigurieren? Sawfish Vs KDE
	* ComputerBild hilft: Selbsthilfegruppe für Leser die zu dumm für Linux sind
	* Ernährungsnavigator: Chips mit Ravioli oder doch besser StudiFood mit

Auf jeden Fall verpassen!


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