Hi Mike, On Wed, July 26, 2006 17:35, Mike Kestner wrote: > I think I've come up with a package division that would be acceptable > from a stability standpoint for us and still satisfy this "no desktop > libs" requirement people seem to be dogmatically enforcing. > > We could split gtk-sharp into two packages: > > gtk-sharp-2.10.0 would keep glib-sharp, pango-sharp, atk-sharp, > gdk-sharp, gtk-sharp, glade-sharp, and gtkdotnet. I would propose this > altered package for inclusion in the Bindings release set.
(I don't know what's in gtkdotnet, but I suppose it's stuff to make it easier to use gtk+) > gnome-sharp-2.16.0 would get gnome-vfs-sharp, gnome-sharp, art-sharp, > rsvg-sharp, vte-sharp, gconf-sharp, and gtkhtml-sharp. I would propose > this package for inclusion in the Desktop release set. > > The division should satisfy all the rules. There is no rule against a > platform binding living in the Desktop release set. This looks like it would work. gnome-vfs-sharp, gnome-sharp and gconf-sharp could go in the bindings suite too, but this would imply either creating a third package or moving them in gtk-sharp-2.10.0. Thanks for working on this! Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
