FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Desktop

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-30-2010, 03:34 PM
Adam Williamson
 
Default GTK+3 advisiblity for F14?

Hi, folks. Just a question - since GNOME 3 is being delayed and won't
ship in F14, does it make sense to have a few apps (but not many) ported
to GTK+ 3 for F14? I can see it causing more trouble along the lines of
the gnome-python2-desktop package. Would it be better to move them back
to GTK+ 2 and postpone porting to GTK+ 3 until F15? What's the plan in
general for backing off from 2.90.x versions of GNOME bits? Thanks!
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
desktop mailing list
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
 
Old 07-30-2010, 03:46 PM
"pbrobinson@gmail.com"
 
Default GTK+3 advisiblity for F14?

On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi, folks. Just a question - since GNOME 3 is being delayed and won't
> ship in F14, does it make sense to have a few apps (but not many) ported
> to GTK+ 3 for F14? I can see it causing more trouble along the lines of
> the gnome-python2-desktop package. Would it be better to move them back
> to GTK+ 2 and postpone porting to GTK+ 3 until F15? What's the plan in
> general for backing off from 2.90.x versions of GNOME bits? Thanks!

With the disabling of gnome-python2-evince the sugar team has an issue
with our sugar-read package which depends on it. Maybe with an extra 6
months the gnome-python2 package can remain gtk2 and the
gojection-introspection and other gnome python bits will be complete
instead.

Peter
--
desktop mailing list
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
 
Old 07-30-2010, 03:54 PM
Adam Williamson
 
Default GTK+3 advisiblity for F14?

On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 16:46 +0100, pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Hi, folks. Just a question - since GNOME 3 is being delayed and won't
> > ship in F14, does it make sense to have a few apps (but not many) ported
> > to GTK+ 3 for F14? I can see it causing more trouble along the lines of
> > the gnome-python2-desktop package. Would it be better to move them back
> > to GTK+ 2 and postpone porting to GTK+ 3 until F15? What's the plan in
> > general for backing off from 2.90.x versions of GNOME bits? Thanks!
>
> With the disabling of gnome-python2-evince the sugar team has an issue
> with our sugar-read package which depends on it.

Yeah, I noticed that, but I didn't see any good option to avoid it; if
we don't rebuild g-p2-d and disable evince, it won't work *at all*,
since it'll still be built against py2.6 :/
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
desktop mailing list
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
 
Old 07-30-2010, 03:55 PM
"pbrobinson@gmail.com"
 
Default GTK+3 advisiblity for F14?

On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 16:46 +0100, pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > Hi, folks. Just a question - since GNOME 3 is being delayed and won't
>> > ship in F14, does it make sense to have a few apps (but not many) ported
>> > to GTK+ 3 for F14? I can see it causing more trouble along the lines of
>> > the gnome-python2-desktop package. Would it be better to move them back
>> > to GTK+ 2 and postpone porting to GTK+ 3 until F15? What's the plan in
>> > general for backing off from 2.90.x versions of GNOME bits? Thanks!
>>
>> With the disabling of gnome-python2-evince the sugar team has an issue
>> with our sugar-read package which depends on it.
>
> Yeah, I noticed that, but I didn't see any good option to avoid it; if
> we don't rebuild g-p2-d and disable evince, it won't work *at all*,
> since it'll still be built against py2.6 :/

I can cope in the short term. As long as its fixed eventually before release!

Peter
--
desktop mailing list
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
 
Old 08-01-2010, 09:28 PM
Bastien Nocera
 
Default GTK+3 advisiblity for F14?

On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 16:55 +0100, pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 16:46 +0100, pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi, folks. Just a question - since GNOME 3 is being delayed and won't
> >> > ship in F14, does it make sense to have a few apps (but not many) ported
> >> > to GTK+ 3 for F14? I can see it causing more trouble along the lines of
> >> > the gnome-python2-desktop package. Would it be better to move them back
> >> > to GTK+ 2 and postpone porting to GTK+ 3 until F15? What's the plan in
> >> > general for backing off from 2.90.x versions of GNOME bits? Thanks!
> >>
> >> With the disabling of gnome-python2-evince the sugar team has an issue
> >> with our sugar-read package which depends on it.
> >
> > Yeah, I noticed that, but I didn't see any good option to avoid it; if
> > we don't rebuild g-p2-d and disable evince, it won't work *at all*,
> > since it'll still be built against py2.6 :/
>
> I can cope in the short term. As long as its fixed eventually before release!

I don't think you'll see a fixed version for F14. Somebody is going to
have to bite the bullet and port the application as it should be.

Not knowing the details, I'm afraid I can't give a more precise help,
but whether it's broken now or in 6 months, somebody will have to do the
work...

--
desktop mailing list
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
 
Old 08-01-2010, 09:33 PM
Bastien Nocera
 
Default GTK+3 advisiblity for F14?

On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 08:34 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hi, folks. Just a question - since GNOME 3 is being delayed and won't
> ship in F14, does it make sense to have a few apps (but not many) ported
> to GTK+ 3 for F14? I can see it causing more trouble along the lines of
> the gnome-python2-desktop package. Would it be better to move them back
> to GTK+ 2 and postpone porting to GTK+ 3 until F15? What's the plan in
> general for backing off from 2.90.x versions of GNOME bits? Thanks!

I discussed this with Richard Hughes, and a number of other people at
GUADEC, and the current plan is to ship what's already ported, and to
make sure that what wasn't ported works as expected.

This will obviously need to be discussed with Matthias, who has a better
idea of how we want to spend our time for F14, and whether a GTK+ 3.x
pre-release dependency is a good idea.

The short version is:
- ship what we have already ported
- spend time polishing the control-center and other ported applications
- ship most of 2.32 for the rest of the desktop

This would be a restrictive schedule for us, but for most applications
we would have support from upstream (or are the upstream).

Cheers

--
desktop mailing list
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
 
Old 08-03-2010, 02:16 AM
Matthias Clasen
 
Default GTK+3 advisiblity for F14?

On Sun, 2010-08-01 at 22:33 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 08:34 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Hi, folks. Just a question - since GNOME 3 is being delayed and won't
> > ship in F14, does it make sense to have a few apps (but not many) ported
> > to GTK+ 3 for F14? I can see it causing more trouble along the lines of
> > the gnome-python2-desktop package. Would it be better to move them back
> > to GTK+ 2 and postpone porting to GTK+ 3 until F15? What's the plan in
> > general for backing off from 2.90.x versions of GNOME bits? Thanks!
>
> I discussed this with Richard Hughes, and a number of other people at
> GUADEC, and the current plan is to ship what's already ported, and to
> make sure that what wasn't ported works as expected.
>
> This will obviously need to be discussed with Matthias, who has a better
> idea of how we want to spend our time for F14, and whether a GTK+ 3.x
> pre-release dependency is a good idea.

GTK3 is not scary or difficult by itself, and porting to it goes module
by module, so there is no strong reason to roll back everything for
modules that are working fine. And we have successfully dealt with a
number of the wide-spread libraries that are linked against gtk, either
by removing the gtk dependency or by making a parallel-installable
version: libnotify, libunique, gnome-desktop, gtksourceview, webkitgtk.

There are some more gtk-using libraries that need to be handled, but the
hard problems are around pygtk and the widespread use of python
throughout the desktop.

I have not yet had time to fully understand how the proposed 2.32 plans
to handle these problems, so I don't have a final proposal for F14 yet,
beyond moving the Gnome3 feature to F15.

I'll try to get a clearer picture of 2.32 tomorrow.



--
desktop mailing list
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
 
Old 08-03-2010, 06:12 PM
Matthias Clasen
 
Default GTK+3 advisiblity for F14?

On Mon, 2010-08-02 at 22:16 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:

> I have not yet had time to fully understand how the proposed 2.32 plans
> to handle these problems, so I don't have a final proposal for F14 yet,
> beyond moving the Gnome3 feature to F15.
>
> I'll try to get a clearer picture of 2.32 tomorrow.

After talking to fellow GNOME release team members a bit, it seems that
the plan for 2.32 is to make everything build with GTK+ 2.x (since there
will be no GTK3 yet), so this is what I recommend we should do, now that
F14 has been branched off:

- Rebuild everything against gtk2. In some cases this may have to wait
for an upstream version with a --with-gtk=2/3 configure option.

- In cases where we updated our packages to a 2.90 version that will not
be part of 2.32 (and thus may not get a --with-gtk=2 switch), we will
have to introduce epochs and back down to 2.31.x versions.

- Wrt. to GConf > GSettings migration, I'm still a bit in the unclear,
but it seems that the control-center is likely going to push ahead with
getting that completed for 2.32.


Comments ?

--
desktop mailing list
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 02:45 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org