GNOME 2.11/2.12 targeting GTK+ 2.8 (ie cairo based)

2005-06-08 Thread Frederic Crozat
Hi all, I only discovered this morning by looking at James commit for jhbuild that GNOME 2.11/2.12 is supposed to ship with GTK+ 2.8 (and therefore Cairo) which might not have been obvious for anybody reading http://live.gnome.org/RoadMap (since there is only a reference to cairo used to replace

Re: GNOME 2.11/2.12 targeting GTK+ 2.8 (ie cairo based)

2005-06-08 Thread Luis Villa
On 6/8/05, Mark McLoughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey, I guess there's quite a few benefits/risks to be weighed up here: - The benefit of having cool new rendering stuff in GNOME 2.12 - The benefit of being able to use all the other new APIs in GTK+ 2.8 for GNOME 2.12

Re: GNOME 2.11/2.12 targeting GTK+ 2.8 (ie cairo based)

2005-06-08 Thread Luis Villa
On 6/8/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/8/05, Mark McLoughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey, I guess there's quite a few benefits/risks to be weighed up here: - The benefit of having cool new rendering stuff in GNOME 2.12 - The benefit of being able to use all

Re: GNOME 2.11/2.12 targeting GTK+ 2.8 (ie cairo based)

2005-06-08 Thread Murray Cumming
On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 09:09 -0400, Luis Villa wrote: Oh, and after the last time we did this, the release team swore mighty oaths to never depend on a released-close-to-gnome-schedule GTK again, [snip] I think we'd love them to be in sync. They are getting there, and if they are there, I think

Re: GNOME 2.11/2.12 targeting GTK+ 2.8 (ie cairo based)

2005-06-08 Thread Andrew Sobala
On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 09:09 -0400, Luis Villa wrote: So, yeah, I'm pretty strongly against this, though I'm open to persuasion. aolMe too/aol, for all the reasons Luis listed. I remember our r-t discussions basically concluded that we'd made a mistake depending on GTK+ for 2.6. 2.6 had stability

Re: GNOME 2.11/2.12 targeting GTK+ 2.8 (ie cairo based)

2005-06-08 Thread Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller
I guess a fair compromise would be to aim for using gtk 2.8 for 2.12, but not using any new functionality in gtk 2.8. That way if it turns out 2.8 is not stable enough we can roll back to 2.6 before release. On the other side it is stable enough then we ensure its gets widely distributed and

Re: i18n and GNOME hackers

2005-06-08 Thread Federico Mena Quintero
On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 17:52 +0200, Danilo egan wrote: I support this initiative by Frederic, and let me add that apart from misreferenced gettext domain names, it's not uncommon for programmers to miss appropriate calls to set up translation when they switch to GtkUIManager (from

Re: i18n and GNOME hackers

2005-06-08 Thread Danilo Šegan
Today at 16:27, Frederic Crozat wrote: So, if you are a non-english native speaker GNOME hacker (or if you are fluent enough to use GNOME in another language than english), please use it by default on your system and report bugs (when translations is there but not displayed). And of course,

Re: i18n and GNOME hackers

2005-06-08 Thread Frederic Crozat
Le mercredi 08 juin 2005 à 17:52 +0200, Danilo ¦egan a écrit : Btw, Frederic, what were the untranslated applications you noticed? I'm running 2.10 since it came out and I didn't notice any regressions in the apps I regularly use. Regression were usually not application wide, but in part of