On Tue, 2005-01-25 at 17:13 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: > <quote who="Andrew Johnson"> > > > Smooth has been maintained and for now will continue to be maintained on > > SF, it is in gtk-engines only too get it out of gnome-themes and > > gnome-themes-extras not because I want to maintain it there. I will > > continue to keep it in sync with the latest stable release + bug fixes but > > generally speaking it only complicates things. It has its own version > > which it will continue to keep, and I hope gets followed, right now it is > > at 0.6, with a quick bug fix release of 0.6.0.1 going to be released once > > I get a chance. > > So why on earth are we duplicating the code in gtk-engines? You're actually > doing work to sync with code that is correctly and sensibly maintained > elsewhere. It means we have 0.6 and 2.10 versions hanging around (because it > is the version of the gtk-engines tarball release that matters, nothing > else). > > It's reasonable that we have a bunch of engines primarily being maintained > in the one module, but it is not at all sensible for us to be duplicating > code and slapping new version numbers on it. > > I suggest only shipping code that is primarily maintained in gtk-engines, > and leaving the other upstreams to release their code under their own terms.
As I said. I don't want it there but last GNOME release I wasn't thinking ahead when I let it make it into gnome-themes, and I never thought at all when I let it get into gnome-themes-extras last year. Paying the price with mayhem and multiple patches to multiple locations. Not again.... It went into gtk-engines to solve that problem for those building from source without the benefit of sanity. I am not going out of my way to maintain it, just add a few minor bug fixes so it doesn't get bug reports about things I already fixed in official stable branch on which its based. For binary purposes I expect people to disable it from gtk-engines and depend on smooth packages based on official smooth releases, with official smooth version numbers. For all practical packaging purposes you should pretend it isn't even there. I am quite sure I even said or implied this in the gtk-engines README. Maybe I simply need to clarify the README more.. And then perhaps rename the file to UNDER_NO_CIRCUMSTANCES_SHOULD_YOU_READ_THIS so it actually has a chance of being read. ;) Andrew _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
