Am Sun, 23 May 2010 12:49:20 +0200 schrieb Christopher Roy Bratusek <[email protected]>:
> Am Sun, 23 May 2010 16:56:14 +0900 (JST) > schrieb Teika Kazura <[email protected]>: > > > 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? > > in the c-part it's not difficult, for rep-gtk we may check for the version. Just to make it clear: we're speaking about an alpha-version, not a stable one. > > 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? > > Actually GTK+3 is "just" an improved GTK+2, but a majority of widgets beeing > used > in Sawfish is going to be removed, because they are marked deprecated since > GTK+ > 2.0.0. Next Sawfish 3.0.0 is *currently* scheduled for June 2010, while GTK+ > 3.0.0 err. June 2011. > is released in September 2010, so we are not that early. Sawfish 3.0.0 is > expected > to also break things, as it's another major version. GTK+2 and 3 and be > installed > at the same time. > > Besides: who said that 1.6x dies immediately when 3.0x entering the > alpha-phase? Of > course testers need GTK+3, but well, you can install > Fedora/Ubuntu/Mandriva/SuSE & > Co. as testdistro (or in VirtualBox), those distros next major release will > ship > GTK+3. And installing GTK+3 manually besides GTK+2 won't include much more > than > GLib3, newer Cairo and Pango, that should be it. > > However keep 3.0.0 at GTK+2 and switching to GTK+3 with 3.2.0 or 3.4.0 > doesn't make > sense. > > > 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.) > > Of course at first only the necessary stuff is implemented. > > > With best regards, > > Teika (Teika kazura) > > > > > -- JETZT! Am Kiosk: Das ComputerBild Linux Spezial! Unter anderem mit: * 100% Startgeschwindkeitsverringerung durch exklusive Tipps! * Linux verstehen: Warum frägt es nicht nach dem "Any Key"? * 2631 verbotene Konfigurationsoptionen lieblos für Sie zusammenkopiert * Linux Guru werden: Wir erstellen ein Skript, dass das Datum ausgibt * Flamen für Anfänger: Die Top 20 Mythen über KDE und GNOME * Test: Wo kann man sich besser zu Tode konfigurieren? Sawfish Vs KDE * ComputerBild hilft: Selbsthilfegruppe für Leser die zu dumm für Linux sind * Ernährungsnavigator: Chips mit Ravioli oder doch besser StudiFood mit Pizza? Auf jeden Fall verpassen! OPNN
