On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 11:07 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote: > At the moment, I think we will just break glibmm ABI at a particular > glibmm version and not attempt to wrap that version of glib for both > glibmm ABIs. > > The current glib is 2.24. The next one will be glib 2.26, probably > within 6 months. I suggest that glibmm 2.26 will wrap glib 2.6, without > breaking ABI. > > Then glibmm 2.28 would break ABI and wrap glib 2.8. > > I think it's wroth waiting until glib 2.28 because I don't believe that > GTK+ 3.0.0 (or GNOME 3) will be done within six months. But that's not > the official GTK+ or GNOME opinion. If I am wrong then we can quickly > adapt.
GNOME 3.0 has just been delayed from September 2010 to March 2011, with a GTK+ 3.0 release expected in December 2010 instead of September 2010: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/devel-announce-list/2010-July/msg00003.html So we do indeed have more time for gtkmm 3.0.0, so we have more time to do an ABI-breaking glibmm if we like. So my plan seems to have worked out so far. > In the meantime, so we can start work in a branch, we need some > temporary ABI name that is obviously not something to consider stable. I > suggest glibmm-2.26maybe . There is a glibmm-3maybe branch that is up to date (like master, but with deprecated stuff removed): http://git.gnome.org/browse/glibmm/log/?h=glibmm-3maybe I have not managed to change the ABI name yet. -- [email protected] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
