Re: [Geeqie-devel] GTK2 GTK3

2016-07-03 Thread Klaus Ethgen 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

Hi Colin,

Am So den  3. Jul 2016 um 18:39 schrieb Colin Clark:
> I am somewhat lost in understanding how this kind of development works 
> (I only worked on embedded micros - very different).

Well, it works how it is best to archive. :-) If something is useful and
have no downside, use it. In the other case, it depends.

> What is the typical arrangement for development of an application that 
> compiles on both GTK2 and GTK3? Is it standard to maintain two separate 
> development trees?

I do not have the knowledge to define the typical arrangement. I just
see how other projects does and try to combine that with common sense
and usability. So that might be good or bad. I might even fail that way
one time or the other.

Am So den  3. Jul 2016 um 18:50 schrieb Greg Troxel:
> Colin Clark  writes:
> > What is the typical arrangement for development of an application that 
> > compiles on both GTK2 and GTK3? Is it standard to maintain two separate 
> > development trees?
> 
> Generally, one or the other is enabld via something like autoconf and
> there are ifdefs when necessary, with an attempt to minimize that.

That is my idea too.

> The reason I ask is because of all the deprecated warnings. For 
> instance, the GTK_STOCK_ warnings could probably be eliminated by simple 
> text substitutions. But that would not compile on GTK2.
> 
> But to put GTK_CHECK_VERSION around every change would be a nightmare.

True. But...

> What is your opinion about how to progress?

Am So den  3. Jul 2016 um 18:50 schrieb Greg Troxel:
> A really good question :-)

The problem currently is that GTK2 is stable and working fine and GTK3
has some bad usability problems but is needed for some new features.

With that in mind I think, we should support both versions and in my
opinion, there is no better way than the ifdef nightmare.

Having two distinguish branches might be more clear but, as Greg already
pointed out, it might be a nightmare to keep them in sync. It also makes
it more difficult for users to compile one or the other version.

A complete different solution would be to use a compatibility layer for
every GTK call (that is different). Maybe that would be the way in the
end if GTK3 stays that nightmare for long.

That would mean to have a private name space for all GTK calls and
"translate" them to the real library calls in different source files
(gtk2.c and gtk3.c plus gtk23.h) and just use one or the other.

But that would also be much work to do.

Currently I tend to keep the ifdef way. But the private function name
space has some potential and some elegances. I don't see a way at all in
different branches. Long term that is not manageable.

On the other hand, if GTK3 gets to a usable state, I would vote to drop
GTK2. But I don't see that coming very near.

Regards
   Klaus
- -- 
Klaus Ethgen  http://www.ethgen.ch/
pub  4096R/4E20AF1C 2011-05-16   Klaus Ethgen 
Fingerprint: 85D4 CA42 952C 949B 1753  62B3 79D0 B06F 4E20 AF1C
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
Comment: Charset: ISO-8859-1
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=f9YC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape
___
Geeqie-devel mailing list
Geeqie-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geeqie-devel

Re: [Geeqie-devel] GTK2 GTK3

2016-07-03 Thread Greg Troxel 

Colin Clark  writes:

> What is the typical arrangement for development of an application that 
> compiles on both GTK2 and GTK3? Is it standard to maintain two separate 
> development trees?

Generally, one or the other is enabld via something like autoconf and
there are ifdefs when necessary, with an attempt to minimize that.

The alternative is to have a branch, but then one has to merge things
all the time.

> The reason I ask is because of all the deprecated warnings. For 
> instance, the GTK_STOCK_ warnings could probably be eliminated by simple 
> text substitutions. But that would not compile on GTK2.
>
> But to put GTK_CHECK_VERSION around every change would be a nightmare.

yes

> What is your opinion about how to progress?

A really good question :-)


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
Attend Shape: An AT Tech Expo July 15-16. Meet us at AT Park in San
Francisco, CA to explore cutting-edge tech and listen to tech luminaries
present their vision of the future. This family event has something for
everyone, including kids. Get more information and register today.
http://sdm.link/attshape___
Geeqie-devel mailing list
Geeqie-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geeqie-devel