Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade
On 28.02.2024 3:20, Jacki wrote: But I assume it's also possible to use Cambalache already. Most important functionality should work. It's also possible to write UI files by hand instead of using Glade. On Tue, 2024-02-27 at 20:58 +0100, Christian Grothoff wrote: Let me just say this: using a RAD tool like Glade is just the only logical thing, it is 1000% more productive for UX development then doing the building of Gtk objects by hand. So for the sake of sanity, please use *some* RAD tool. Besides, AFAIK GtkBuilder isn't deprecated, just Glade itself is being rewritten/replaced. We used Glade for quite a while despite it being WIP/in beta, with GNOME's reluctance to declare something stable I'm not sure a WIP RAD tool is inherently a bad idea. But I *am* sure that doing gtk_box_add() by hand is the road to insanity. So I would very strongly recommend using Cambalance --- and to use the opportunity to clean up the GUIs ;-). On 2/27/24 20:51, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote: I think our use of glade is historical. It just made sense to somebody (not me, my guess is Christian). I personally have no issue with moving away from glade as RAD tool as I find it very cumbersome myself. Note, however, that it will also mean writing a lot of code that is currently hidden behind those glade XML files. OTOH moving to a WIP RAD tool is also not such a smart idea, maybe. But that depends on the maturity of cambalanche, which I cannot judge myself right now as I have never tried it. BR On 27.02.24 20:19, Gotam Gorabh wrote: Hello Martin, Note that migration from gtk3 to gtk4 especially for gnunet- gtk is not trivial: We use libglade, which does not exist for gtk4. We will need to decide if we want to migrate to something like https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/ < https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-release d/> or something different entirely. Why can't we use the proper GObject concept like other gnome application does? E.g. GNOME Settings, Nautilus, etc. which can handle the properties, and signals in a structured way. Thanks. Regards Gotam Gorabh -- O< ascii ribbon - stop html email! - www.asciiribbon.org OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re:
Hi, first of all, this is the primary GSoC issue: https://bugs.gnunet.org/view.php?id=5679 There are unfortunately no gnunet-gtk issues to point to I think. This is the full list: https://bugs.gnunet.org/view_all_bug_page.php But, I am not sure how many of those actually still apply. Maybe look around in the current UI and try to fix obvious ugly things. BR On 28.02.24 10:46, Gotam Gorabh wrote: Hello, Can you suggest to me some Issues or features to work on to get a better understanding of the codebase? Thanks and regards Gotam
[no subject]
Hello, Can you suggest to me some Issues or features to work on to get a better understanding of the codebase? Thanks and regards Gotam
Re: GNUnet-developers Digest, Vol 224, Issue 12
t; c...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > > > > Note, however, that it will also mean writing a lot of code that is > > currently hidden behind those glade XML files. > > OTOH moving to a WIP RAD tool is also not such a smart idea, maybe. But > > that depends on the maturity of cambalanche. > > > Make sense. > > So I would very strongly recommend using Cambalance --- and > > to use the opportunity to clean up the GUIs ;-). > > > > Yeah, I will explore Cambalance :) > > I think GNOME published a blog post for porting from GTK3 to GTK4 as > > well. > > > > Indeed, I have read it. > > So from the above discussion, I guess we should explore the Cambalance. > > BR > > Gotam > > On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 at 10:23, wrote: > > > Send GNUnet-developers mailing list submissions to > > gnunet-developers@gnu.org > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > gnunet-developers-requ...@gnu.org > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > gnunet-developers-ow...@gnu.org > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of GNUnet-developers digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > >1. GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Gotam Gorabh) > >2. Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Schanzenbach, Martin) > >3. Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Christian Grothoff) > >4. Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Jacki) > >5. GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Gotam Gorabh) > > > > > > -- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:49:20 +0530 > > From: Gotam Gorabh > > To: gnunet-developers@gnu.org > > Subject: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade > > Message-ID: > > < > > cah7azzz1ihpeksqxjn2wwwt-t1yokycbqtv94cqo8wgc5ut...@mail.gmail.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > > > Hello Martin, > > > > Note that migration from gtk3 to gtk4 especially for gnunet-gtk is not > > > trivial: We use libglade, which does not exist for gtk4. > > > We will need to decide if we want to migrate to something like > > > https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/ > or > > > something different entirely. > > > > > > > Why can't we use the proper GObject concept like other gnome application > > does? E.g. GNOME Settings, Nautilus, etc. which can handle the > properties, > > and signals in a structured way. > > > > Thanks. Regards > > > > Gotam Gorabh > > -- next part -- > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > > URL: < > > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnunet-developers/attachments/20240228/1a62b873/attachment.htm > > > > > > > -- > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 20:51:50 +0100 > > From: "Schanzenbach, Martin" > > To: gnunet-developers@gnu.org > > Subject: Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade > > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > > > > I think our use of glade is historical. > > It just made sense to somebody (not me, my guess is Christian). > > > > I personally have no issue with moving away from glade as RAD tool as I > > find it very cumbersome myself. > > Note, however, that it will also mean writing a lot of code that is > > currently hidden behind those glade XML files. > > > > OTOH moving to a WIP RAD tool is also not such a smart idea, maybe. But > > that depends on the maturity of cambalanche, which I cannot judge myself > > right now as I have never tried it. > > > > BR > > > > On 27.02.24 20:19, Gotam Gorabh wrote: > > > Hello Martin, > > > > > > Note that migration from gtk3 to gtk4 especially for gnunet-gtk is > > not > > > trivial: We use libglade, which does not exist for gtk4. > > > We will need to decide if we want to migrate to something like > > > > https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/ > > > < > > https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/> or > >
Re: GNUnet-developers Digest, Vol 224, Issue 11
> > Note, however, that it will also mean writing a lot of code that is > currently hidden behind those glade XML files. OTOH moving to a WIP RAD tool is also not such a smart idea, maybe. But > that depends on the maturity of cambalanche. Make sense. So I would very strongly recommend using Cambalance --- and > to use the opportunity to clean up the GUIs ;-). > Yeah, I will explore Cambalance :) I think GNOME published a blog post for porting from GTK3 to GTK4 as > well. > Indeed, I have read it. So from the above discussion, I guess we should explore the Cambalance. BR Gotam On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 at 10:23, wrote: > Send GNUnet-developers mailing list submissions to > gnunet-developers@gnu.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > gnunet-developers-requ...@gnu.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > gnunet-developers-ow...@gnu.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of GNUnet-developers digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > >1. GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Gotam Gorabh) >2. Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Schanzenbach, Martin) >3. Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Christian Grothoff) >4. Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Jacki) >5. GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Gotam Gorabh) > > > -- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:49:20 +0530 > From: Gotam Gorabh > To: gnunet-developers@gnu.org > Subject: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade > Message-ID: > < > cah7azzz1ihpeksqxjn2wwwt-t1yokycbqtv94cqo8wgc5ut...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hello Martin, > > Note that migration from gtk3 to gtk4 especially for gnunet-gtk is not > > trivial: We use libglade, which does not exist for gtk4. > > We will need to decide if we want to migrate to something like > > https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/ or > > something different entirely. > > > > Why can't we use the proper GObject concept like other gnome application > does? E.g. GNOME Settings, Nautilus, etc. which can handle the properties, > and signals in a structured way. > > Thanks. Regards > > Gotam Gorabh > -- next part -- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnunet-developers/attachments/20240228/1a62b873/attachment.htm > > > > -- > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 20:51:50 +0100 > From: "Schanzenbach, Martin" > To: gnunet-developers@gnu.org > Subject: Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > > I think our use of glade is historical. > It just made sense to somebody (not me, my guess is Christian). > > I personally have no issue with moving away from glade as RAD tool as I > find it very cumbersome myself. > Note, however, that it will also mean writing a lot of code that is > currently hidden behind those glade XML files. > > OTOH moving to a WIP RAD tool is also not such a smart idea, maybe. But > that depends on the maturity of cambalanche, which I cannot judge myself > right now as I have never tried it. > > BR > > On 27.02.24 20:19, Gotam Gorabh wrote: > > Hello Martin, > > > > Note that migration from gtk3 to gtk4 especially for gnunet-gtk is > not > > trivial: We use libglade, which does not exist for gtk4. > > We will need to decide if we want to migrate to something like > > https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/ > > < > https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/> or > > something different entirely. > > > > > > Why can't we use the proper GObject concept like other gnome application > > does? E.g. GNOME Settings, Nautilus, etc. which can handle the > > properties, and signals in a structured way. > > > > Thanks. Regards > > > > Gotam Gorabh > > > > -- > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 20:58:36 +0100 > From: Christian Grothoff > To: gnunet-developers@gnu.org > Subject: Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade > Message-ID: <7c92b3da-bac5-4b34-8472-69b9fbeb5...@gnunet.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed > >
Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade
Just to also throw another option out there. Since we now have a REST API we may even want to consider writing it in something else than C: https://www.gtk.org/docs/language-bindings/index Even if we write it in C, we may want to use the REST API, it would theoretically make it easier to do graphical remote or container administration. In any case, I do not mind using RAD again, but calling the output of glade and friends something other than madness did not really look into what those XML files look like. They are unmaintainable, unless the tool continues to work and you know how to use it. Maybe GtkBuilder and hand-crafted XML files is a good compromise? BR Martin On 28.02.24 01:20, Jacki wrote: Exactly. In GTK3 you can still use Glade but import the UI files via GtkBuilder. In GTK4 they adjusted widgets quite a bit. So instead of Glade you need to use Cambalache because Glade won't be ported over. In fact Cambalache is developed by one of the core contributors behind Glade. Since Camabalache is still in development we could port over to GTK3 using GtkBuilder with designing UI in Glade though. The required changes from GTK3 to GTK4 shouldn't be huge in most cases. Cambalache also supports converting the UI files from GTK3 to GTK4. I think GNOME published a blog post for porting from GTK3 to GTK4 as well. But I assume it's also possible to use Cambalache already. Most important functionality should work. BR Jacki On Tue, 2024-02-27 at 20:58 +0100, Christian Grothoff wrote: Let me just say this: using a RAD tool like Glade is just the only logical thing, it is 1000% more productive for UX development then doing the building of Gtk objects by hand. So for the sake of sanity, please use *some* RAD tool. Besides, AFAIK GtkBuilder isn't deprecated, just Glade itself is being rewritten/replaced. We used Glade for quite a while despite it being WIP/in beta, with GNOME's reluctance to declare something stable I'm not sure a WIP RAD tool is inherently a bad idea. But I *am* sure that doing gtk_box_add() by hand is the road to insanity. So I would very strongly recommend using Cambalance --- and to use the opportunity to clean up the GUIs ;-). On 2/27/24 20:51, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote: I think our use of glade is historical. It just made sense to somebody (not me, my guess is Christian). I personally have no issue with moving away from glade as RAD tool as I find it very cumbersome myself. Note, however, that it will also mean writing a lot of code that is currently hidden behind those glade XML files. OTOH moving to a WIP RAD tool is also not such a smart idea, maybe. But that depends on the maturity of cambalanche, which I cannot judge myself right now as I have never tried it. BR On 27.02.24 20:19, Gotam Gorabh wrote: Hello Martin, Note that migration from gtk3 to gtk4 especially for gnunet- gtk is not trivial: We use libglade, which does not exist for gtk4. We will need to decide if we want to migrate to something like https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/ < https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-release d/> or something different entirely. Why can't we use the proper GObject concept like other gnome application does? E.g. GNOME Settings, Nautilus, etc. which can handle the properties, and signals in a structured way. Thanks. Regards Gotam Gorabh
