Re: gtk 2.0.x or 2.9+ for etch g-i ? (Was: graphics or text as default)
On 5/16/06, Frans Pop <email@example.com> wrote:
On Tuesday 16 May 2006 09:37, you wrote:
> I disagree, they is a lot of changes and new features for 2.10 and "a
> random 2.9 snapshot" is not something we are wanting to ship with a
> stable Debian
Thank you for this quick and sane reply.
Please consider that the GNOME guys might have answered in the light
of _all_ the features and _all_ the bugs that might be present at this
point in the current gtk, BUT the G-I need just a *tiny* piece of
functionality of the whole GTK libraries (Attilio can give you a hint
on which parts are actually used). (Just to give a scale of what we
are talking about, not even the standard OK and cancel buttons are
used in G-I.)
Taking into account that, IMHO, it would make sense to have a
different source package for the G-I suff (mainly because of the DFB
backend and packaging issues that may occur), would you, the GNOME
team, consider to state your oppinion on such a decision of using a
CVS/2.9+ snapshot _just_ for the G-I stuff?
I think this is a huge difference and many of the concerns you might
have would not apply to this given situation.
Attilio could you please summarize what is actualy used in G-I so that
the GNOME guys can say what they think for this particular case?
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein