On Fri, 1 Jul 2016 06:18:28 +0200, Adam wrote in message <20160701041828.gc5...@angband.pl>:
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 04:40:30AM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT > consult wrote: > > I'm currently packaging recent geeqie for Ubuntu Trustry > > (which I'm still running on my notebook), and that leads me > > to an interesting question: > > > > How to properly package applications that can be built for > > gtk2 vs. gtk3 ? > > I'd say GTK3 doesn't "have regressions", but "it's one big > regression". Just to name a few: CSD, font selection dialog, file > open/save dialog, etc. > > However, I see most project which didn't abandon the GTK ship > altogether (Chromium, LXDE, etc) downgrading to GTK3 these days: ..appears "we" are "upgrading" Chromium to GTK3 now: http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/c/chromium-browser/chromium-browser_52.0.2743.82-4_changelog > Firefox (was in unstable, reverted for now), MATE (already), Xfce > (not yet done upstream), etc. Thus, it looks like we'll suffer it in > the long run. > > > Should we have two separate packages (eg. geeqie-gtk2 vs. > > geeqie-gtk3) ? > > I'd bother only if you care about Gnome3. And as we're on dng rather > than debian-devel, I guess you don't. > > > And how to handle other optional features (eg. lirc support) ? > > Typically the answer is "include everything unless it'd pull _really_ > fat dependencies, and even then the optional stuff should still be > packaged", but it depends on whom you package it for. Best to use > your best judgement. > > > Meow! -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng