[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Xpert] Re: Possible show stopper in libXaw

[thanks for sending this to a public list, Keith]

On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 03:07:30PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> > > > The spec says you get "an error" when the following are true:
> > > > 
> > > > 	The widget is managed.
> > > > 	The widget's parent is realized.
> > > > 	The parent's class is not a subclass of compositeWidgetClass.
> > I'm getting tons and tons of bug reports from Debian users of my beta
> > XFree86 packages over this issue; if I release official packages like this
> > that will turn into a flood.  Please, please work something out with Keith.
> I'm pretty stuck at this point; the spec is rather clear on this issue and 
> the implementation has always been broken.  X usually focuses on the spec, 
> but in this case:
> 	1)	the implementation has always been broken.
> 	2)	the implementation was written *before* the spec.
> 	3)	the implementation is well behaved (and useful).
> 	4)	changing the implementation breaks most apps.
> Given the haphazard development of the spec, I'm tempted to ignore it in 
> the case of Xt and focus on making applications function again.  I'd also 
> suggest editing the spec and making the existing behaviour standard.
> This will cause errors when VSW5 is run against our Xt version.
> I don't expect to hear any complaints on this list for breaking compliance 
> with the Xt spec; unless people have serious objections, I think we should 
> revert Xt to the original code.

I have no objections to reverting the change, or attempting to get the spec
modified.  Thanks for suggesting a resolution I think we can all live with.
Ordinarily I don't like it when implementations break a spec, but I think
this may be an exception.

G. Branden Robinson             |
Debian GNU/Linux                |    If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws
branden@debian.org              |    will @goH7OjBd7*dnfk=<q4fDj]Kz?.
http://www.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgp24PJIfOAZc.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: