On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Christian Schoenebeck <
schoeneb...@linuxsampler.org> wrote:

>
> > With cooperation and compatibility layers in GTK, GTK would move forward
> > less quickly, but it would maybe yield a better outcome globally when
> > taking into account higher-level libraries and applications.
>
> This is always the common argument "retaining old APIs means more work".
> But
> if you look at what APIs had been removed in gtk (and glib and co) in the
> past, most of them could have been preserved with no or little effort on
> library level.
>
> I mean to me it looks like nobody even considered in the past to keep old
> APIs
> at all. Currently it is just a common rule "ok, we are now on the next
> major
> version branch, we are now safe to do whatever we want to do, so let's
> start
> removing everything we don't like anymore".
>

Maybe give a concrete example of an api that we could have 'preserved with
no effort"
and yet removed out of folly ? I would be interested.


> Addressing major library changes on application level often means *much*
> more
> effort, because as application you don't necessarily have access to library
> internal things nor can you make certain presumptions. Plus not only one
> gtk
> app project has to do that gtk version compatibility work, all gtk app
> projects need to do them.  If you calculate how many man hours are wasted
> on
> all these applications, just for retaining compatiblity with the latest
> major
> gtk version, then you probably might see that the trash can decisions are
> currently made far too easily on library level.
>

To me this reads like a misunderstanding.

Moving an application from GTK3 to GTK4 means porting work. But you do it
only once,
and you don't retain GTK3 compatibility. At least, that is not what the
GTK+ team
recommends you should do.

If you want to stick with GTK3, you are more than welcome to do so for
years to come.
_______________________________________________
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list

Reply via email to