Re: [Gegl-developer] GEGL and GTK+, a proposal
2011/6/12 Jon Nordby jono...@gmail.com: So I propose to: - Create a new gegl-gtk repository, containing the new library (alternative is to have it as a toplevel in gegl repo, if anyone can present good arguments for that I don't mind) First of all, I think the name should be gegl-ui, not gegl-gtk, in case we want to provide a widget for say Qt. I support moving the UI stuff into a separate git repository; it will be nice to have separate commit histories. / Martin -- My GIMP Blog: http://www.chromecode.com/ GIMP 2.8 schedule on tasktaste.com ___ Gegl-developer mailing list Gegl-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer
Re: [Gegl-developer] GEGL and GTK+, a proposal
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Martin Nordholts ense...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/6/12 Jon Nordby jono...@gmail.com: So I propose to: - Create a new gegl-gtk repository, containing the new library (alternative is to have it as a toplevel in gegl repo, if anyone can present good arguments for that I don't mind) First of all, I think the name should be gegl-ui, not gegl-gtk, in case we want to provide a widget for say Qt. I support moving the UI stuff into a separate git repository; it will be nice to have separate commit histories. Having a library that depends on a lot of different UI frameworks might not be conductive to encourage adoption. Since this would mean that in distributions you would be pulling in the packages for all the possible dependencies when wanting only one of them. There is already a Clutter based GEGL integration library, and to me it makes sense for there to be separate ones for different ui toolkits. http://git.clutter-project.org/clutter-gegl/ /Øyvind K. -- «The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed» -- William Gibson http://pippin.gimp.org/ http://ffii.org/ ___ Gegl-developer mailing list Gegl-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer
Re: [Gegl-developer] GEGL and GTK+, a proposal
2011/6/13 Øyvind Kolås pip...@gimp.org: On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Martin Nordholts ense...@gmail.com wrote: First of all, I think the name should be gegl-ui, not gegl-gtk, in case we want to provide a widget for say Qt. I support moving the UI stuff into a separate git repository; it will be nice to have separate commit histories. Having a library that depends on a lot of different UI frameworks might not be conductive to encourage adoption. Since this would mean that in distributions you would be pulling in the packages for all the possible dependencies when wanting only one of them. There is already a Clutter based GEGL integration library, and to me it makes sense for there to be separate ones for different ui toolkits. http://git.clutter-project.org/clutter-gegl/ It would be separate libraries, just a common git repository. But I've changed my mind, it probably makes most sense to have one git repo per target toolkit anyway and call the GTK one gegl-gtk. / Martin -- My GIMP Blog: http://www.chromecode.com/ GIMP 2.8 schedule on tasktaste.com ___ Gegl-developer mailing list Gegl-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer
Re: [Gegl-developer] GEGL and GTK+, a proposal
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Jon Nordby jono...@gmail.com wrote: I had the same thought, and eventually ended with the same conclusion: different repos. I actually started some Qt stuff but realized I get enough of that in my day-job. So GTK first, then we'll see. Øyvind: please give your explicit OK to the relisencing. I am fine with the GeglView code being relicensed to LGPLv3+ :) /Øyvind K. -- «The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed» -- William Gibson http://pippin.gimp.org/ http://ffii.org/ ___ Gegl-developer mailing list Gegl-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer
