Hey,
This thread has just petered out, but Alex still needs an answer.
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 14:59 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 15:53 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 13:50 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
- The benefit of being able
Le jeudi 16 juin 2005 16:13 +0100, Mark McLoughlin a crit :
Is it ok if nautilus depends on glib 2.8 for this? This doesn't mean we
have to use gtk+ 2.8, gtk+ 2.6 works fine with glib 2.8.
Its a bit strange as glib and gtk+ have historically released very much
in lockstep. However,
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 09:33 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 15:12 +0200, Jeroen Zwartepoorte wrote:
Since everybody is talking about how glitz will eventually speedup
drawing operations by using hardware accelerated OpenGL, i built it
and then rebuilt cairo so cairo will
Le vendredi 10 juin 2005 à 13:10 -0400, Luis Villa a écrit :
Each of the major distributors could
(should?) package 2.7.0
I've put .deb packages (i386) of the current pango/gtk CVS for Ubuntu
here:
deb http://people.ubuntu.com/~seb128/gtk ./
Cheers,
Sebastien Bacher
On 6/14/05, Vincent Untz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le mardi 14 juin 2005 à 11:57 +0200, Sebastien Bacher a écrit :
Le vendredi 10 juin 2005 à 13:10 -0400, Luis Villa a écrit :
Each of the major distributors could
(should?) package 2.7.0
I've put .deb packages (i386) of the current
For non-local servers without Render, Cairo will allow us to eliminate
the round-trips... a huge win.
Show me the money!
Back in the real world, new code goes in and someone files a performance
bug. Then you, Owen, seem to take that as a personal insult and close
it as NOTABUG or WONTFIX.
quote who=Morten Welinder
For non-local servers without Render, Cairo will allow us to eliminate
the round-trips... a huge win.
Show me the money!
Morten, I can understand your frustration, but to abuse some more movie
quotes: Your tone was pretty bogus, and we should all be excellent to
On Sun, 2005-06-12 at 22:53 -0400, Morten Welinder wrote:
For non-local servers without Render, Cairo will allow us to eliminate
the round-trips... a huge win.
Show me the money!
Back in the real world, new code goes in and someone files a performance
bug. Then you, Owen, seem to
Since everybody is talking about how glitz will eventually speedup
drawing operations by using hardware accelerated OpenGL, i built it
and then rebuilt cairo so cairo will detect glitz and compile with
support for it.
How does glitz further integrate into the desktop stack? Can i make
gtk+ use
On 6/9/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/9/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/9/05, Jon K Hellan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 14:39 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
If we're talking about performance/stability in the context of
whether
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 09:21 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
On 6/9/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/9/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/9/05, Jon K Hellan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 14:39 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
If we're talking about
On 6/10/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't seen this announced on gtk-devel or here, so:
http://gtkperf.sourceforge.net/
Apparently this is a test tool to test gtk performance. Would be great
to have someone test 2.7 with it.
Went ahead and did it myself.
On 6/10/05, Alexander Larsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 09:40 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
On 6/10/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't seen this announced on gtk-devel or here, so:
http://gtkperf.sourceforge.net/
Apparently this is a test
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 15:12 +0200, Jeroen Zwartepoorte wrote:
Since everybody is talking about how glitz will eventually speedup
drawing operations by using hardware accelerated OpenGL, i built it
and then rebuilt cairo so cairo will detect glitz and compile with
support for it.
How does
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 14:47 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 19:00 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
- To be realistic, if GNOME-2.12 is released after GTK+-2.8,
most distributors are going to ship using them together.
So, the release team could decide to go with 2.6
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 09:47 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
On 6/10/05, Alexander Larsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 09:40 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
On 6/10/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't seen this announced on gtk-devel or here, so:
On 6/10/05, Mark McLoughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 19:00 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
- To be realistic, if GNOME-2.12 is released after GTK+-2.8,
most distributors are going to ship using them together.
So, the release team could decide to go with 2.6 even with
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 10:21 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
But the last time we rushed out a gtk-gnome paired release, and got
ourselves locked into the new APIs so that we couldn't back out, the
result was that any distro actually paying attention would have
noticed that our 'latest stable set'
On 6/10/05, Owen Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 10:21 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
But the last time we rushed out a gtk-gnome paired release, and got
ourselves locked into the new APIs so that we couldn't back out, the
result was that any distro actually paying
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 13:10 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
On 6/10/05, Owen Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 10:21 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
But the last time we rushed out a gtk-gnome paired release, and got
ourselves locked into the new APIs so that we couldn't back
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 17:49 -0400, Morten Welinder wrote:
the problem with gtk+/cairo in a stable setting is that it has only
seen testing and been designed for hello world. You need to consider
something bigger!
Thanks for telling me how I designed the gtk+/cairo integration,
I had no idea.
Owen,
the problem with gtk+/cairo in a stable setting is that it has only
seen testing and been designed for hello world. You need to consider
something bigger!
Try putting 600-1000 pango layouts on the screen at once. GTK+ 2.6 is
already not very snappy with that. Then make sure your X
Frederic Crozat wrote:
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
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 12:10 +0100, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
It has not been tested it was too soon to test. Why are people so
afraid of gtk+ 2.7 without even trying it? It really is quite stable
now.
I think it's because in these enlightened times, people use the GNOME
stack that
On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 11:30 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
- GObject introspection: The current prototype in the
gobject-instrospection module in cvs is not ready for inclusion yet.
I feel that we would do better to not rush this in 2.8 at this point.
Agreed. Also adapting language
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 14:39 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Matthias's mail basically says that that isn't going to be an issue
this time and details what the GTK+ guys are doing to make sure of that.
So, lets not get things mixed up here. Performance worries are very
different
On 6/9/05, Jon K Hellan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 14:39 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
If we're talking about performance/stability in the context of whether
GNOME 2.12 should use GTK+ 2.8, we're effectively saying I think the
GTK+ team might ship a unstable or
quote who=Mark McLoughlin
I think these kind of questions are only relevant in the context of
deciding on the *gtk* schedule. I don't think they're very relevant in the
context of deciding whether GNOME 2.12 should use GTK+ 2.8. If we're all
confident the schedules line up, then I don't think
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 01:17 +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote:
quote who=Mark McLoughlin
I think these kind of questions are only relevant in the context of
deciding on the *gtk* schedule. I don't think they're very relevant in the
context of deciding whether GNOME 2.12 should use GTK+ 2.8. If
On 6/9/05, Jon K Hellan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 10:49 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
first 'column' of times is gtk 2.6, second is gtk/cairo HEAD of
yesterday, both with the Mist theme:
GtkEntry - time: 0.43 0.76
GtkComboBox - time: 12.61 15.30
GtkComboBoxEntry -
Somewhat random set of comments:
- For all the reasons that it makes sense for GNOME to stick to it's
published schedules, it makes sense for GTK+ to stick to it's
published schedules. While we haven't always done a great job
in the past (GTK+-2.2.0 was particularly bad), that doesn't
On Thu, 2005-06-09 at 10:49 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
On 6/9/05, Luis Villa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Went ahead and did it myself. TextView is brutally slower (300-400%),
some other things are 25-30% slower, and some things actually get
faster. Disclaimer: I'm pretty sure I did this right and
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
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
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
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
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
37 matches
Mail list logo
