El lun., 17 sept. 2018 a las 15:13, Andriy Grytsenko (<and...@rep.kiev.ua>) escribió: > > Hello! > > Mario Rugiero has written on Sunday, 16 September, at 17:59: > > >While running some routine checks (the likes that motivated my > >patches), I found libfm's source includes a few files coming from exo, > >nicely dated to ease comparison to upstream. > >However, they are also /dated/ (2009-08-30), and it's likely some of > >the bugs detected by the tools are already fixed upstream, and also > >many more the tools didn't catch. > > Actually they were initially taken from libexo but rewritten a lot (GTK3 > compatibility, accessibility, bugs, etc.). Some time (few years I think) > ago I checked XFCE sources and imported relevant fixes into our code. As > a matter of fact, I planned to further rework it, at least ExoTreeView > class requires a massive rewrite. Unfortunately I constantly run out of > free time so never started that rework. I see. Then, on the short term I think we should at the very least update the misleading comment at the top of the source files. That's where I got the date from. > > [.......] > >Number 3 also comes with a lot of breakage, and not only means aiming > >at a moving target, but it can cause harm to distributions, as they > >may need to update the library and we may not fully support it for a > >variety of reasons, one being we don't have yet complete support for > >GTK3. > > That is not true. Complete GTK3 support was aimed yet for 1.2.0 version, > and few discovered bugs were fixed since then. And, BTW, while libfm had > GTK3 full support, libexo didn't, they added partial support on it much > later. Another problem is that GTK3 is still buggy, it's why I avoid it > personally. But LXDE as a whole should be working with GTK3 for a while, > and there are distros that use GTK3-only builds for all LXDE components. I'm sorry I didn't clarify, but I meant LXDE would need GTK3, but now that I think about it, even if LXDE doesn't support GTK3, there's nothing impeding using GTK2 for the components that don't support GTK3. > > >I think the most reasonable route would be to fix the immediate bugs > >(as in option 1), then migrate to near-upstream and later move to use > >it as a library. > >Of course, I'm thinking of a span of at least several months. > > Depend on libexo is bad move, we'd get retro-bugs fixed long time ago, we > will depend on XFCE intsallation, we will depend on XFCE developers, we > will lose few our features and much more. And since actually libexo is a > modified version of GTK+ classes (GtkIconView and GtkTreeView), following > your logic we should abandon all our extra features and go stright to GTK > classes as GTK gets even more attention than XFCE, right? :) The retro-bugs are a real drawback, as is not importing the fixes for the alternative. Now, on installing XFCE, I don't think that's the case. Such an assertion is equivalent to stating writing a FM based con libfm requires installing LXDE. Also, keep in mind I thought the file was mostly borrowed at the time of writing my original e-mail. This means I never proposed dropping any features. >
PS: if you can give me an idea of the changes you had in store, I might see if I can lend a hand :) > With best regards, > Andriy. > Regards, Mario. > > _______________________________________________ > Lxde-list mailing list > Lxde-list@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxde-list _______________________________________________ Lxde-list mailing list Lxde-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxde-list
