On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Paul Davis wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Allin Cottrell wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> >
> >> > It has certainly been explained that that is the situation on
> >> > Windows, and I fully accept it. It's less clear that it should be
> >> > th
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Allin Cottrell wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>
>> > It has certainly been explained that that is the situation on
>> > Windows, and I fully accept it. It's less clear that it should be
>> > the situation on OS X, with its *nix-type substructure
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> > It has certainly been explained that that is the situation on
> > Windows, and I fully accept it. It's less clear that it should be
> > the situation on OS X, with its *nix-type substructure.
>
> You have it backwards. It was from the GTK-on-OS-X peopl
> It has certainly been explained that that is the situation on
> Windows, and I fully accept it. It's less clear that it should be
> the situation on OS X, with its *nix-type substructure.
You have it backwards. It was from the GTK-on-OS-X people (well, at
least those that I have heard from) that
On Sun, 29 Aug 2010, Paul Davis wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Allin Cottrell wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Aug 2010, Kristian Rietveld wrote:
> >
> >> For a GTK+ runtime package ("GTK+ Framework"), I think you should
> >> check out what has been done in the past. It is by no means an easy
>
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 5:43 AM, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> Hello Paul,
>
> 2010/8/30 Paul Davis :
>>> As long as the people working on GTK-OSX do it with a us-vs-them
>>> attitude (like you display here by talking about the GTK developers in
>>> third person), things are not going to change. If you st
Hello Paul,
2010/8/30 Paul Davis :
>> As long as the people working on GTK-OSX do it with a us-vs-them
>> attitude (like you display here by talking about the GTK developers in
>> third person), things are not going to change. If you start
>> considering yourself part of the team and actively enga
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Matthias Clasen
wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 12:35 AM, John Ralls wrote:
>
>> You might not like the warnings about the quality of Gtk+ Quartz, but when I
>> wrote them a year ago, no one had touched the quartz backend for 8 months.
>> Since then, one devel
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Allin Cottrell wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Aug 2010, Kristian Rietveld wrote:
>
>> For a GTK+ runtime package ("GTK+ Framework"), I think you should
>> check out what has been done in the past. It is by no means an easy
>> task. The latest code and instructions for this
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010, Kristian Rietveld wrote:
> For a GTK+ runtime package ("GTK+ Framework"), I think you should
> check out what has been done in the past. It is by no means an easy
> task. The latest code and instructions for this are at the GTK-OSX
> website if I am not mistaken.
I'm aware
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010, John Ralls wrote:
[ in response to
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2010-August/msg00244.html
]
> Gtk-OSX is *not* part of Gtk+.
Well, perhaps that's the problem right there. I've got nothing
"personal" against Gtk-OSX but it seems that the main GTK site
should
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 12:35 AM, John Ralls wrote:
> You might not like the warnings about the quality of Gtk+ Quartz, but when I
> wrote them a year ago, no one had touched the quartz backend for 8 months.
> Since then, one developer (Kristian Reitveld) has fixed many of the
> outstanding bu
e, will not leap to far before they get the truth.
WidgetOS X WindowsLinux
GtkWindow60%99% 100%
GtkButton
...
...
> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 10:46:55 +0200
> Subject: Re: Gtk-OSX (was: Website proposal for usability)
> From: k..
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 6:35 AM, John Ralls wrote:
>> I don't know how many people share these views, but if I'm not
>> totally out on a limb I would be willing to draft a page along the
>> lines I'm talking about (recruiting help from those who are more
>> knowledgeable). I'd also be willing to t
Hi John,
2010/8/27 John Ralls :
>
> Gtk-OSX is *not* part of Gtk+.
Maybe that's something we should fix? Resources around Gtk+ are
already way too fragmented.
--
Cheers,
Alberto Ruiz
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail
On Aug 26, 2010, at 8:08 PM, Allin Cottrell wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2010, Devin Samarin wrote:
>
>> I moved the URL from
>>
>> http://eboyjr.homelinux.org:8080/gtk/
>> to
>> http://eboyjr.homelinux.org:8081/
>
> This looks good to me. But given that the website is getting a lot
> of attention,
16 matches
Mail list logo
