Hi. I approve that it should be that gtk3 is an option, not a switch now. Is it easy to support both 2 and 3, Chris?
It may be obvious, but * many apps rely on gtk+2, so it won't die immediately. In gentoo Linux for example, gtk+1 is still available. * Is gtk+3 API design stable enough? If the upstream causes a flood of changes, it'll be a waste. * When will distros and other apps support gtk+3? Not soon, so I don't feel like pulling in large dependency tree for gtk+3, only for Sawfish. * If our kind people don't feel like using the latest Sawfish, then it slows down the development. But I thank Chris. It is not a preferred task, and requires skills, but if gtk+2 dies sometime in the future, then who'll do it? On the other hand, rep-gtk is only used by Sawfish, so I'm afraid it might be too much to make rep-gtk support all widgets of gtk. Only needed are sufficient, no? (It's really unlikely, but if a saviour comes, and gives us a Sawfish re-implemented in some other good Lisp, then rep-gtk is not necessary.) With best regards, Teika (Teika kazura)
