Proposal: An Xfce C++ language binding for GTK+
jcf at tpg.com.au
Fri Oct 8 11:53:57 CEST 2004
Benedikt Meurer wrote:
> So, thats my point of view. Now on to the GFC proposal:
> 1) GFC is mostly stable, I haven't discovered any real problems during
> my testing.
> 2) GFC is a lightweight wrapper (mostly).
> 3) GFC is well designed (mostly).
> That said, it fits well with Xfce's philosophy. There are of course
> some points that need discussion, as mentioned above, but that
> shouldn't be a real problem after all.
> I'm really interested to have atleast one high level language binding
> for Xfce and I'd like to help you integrating GFC into Xfce. The
> question that drives me currently is: How would you like to see GFC in
> the future? As a (mostly) separate project or as an integrated part of
I don't see GFC surviving on its own. One-man projects seldom do. But
I'm dedicated in what I do and I want to continue. I have been thinking
about making this proposal for some time because as you said GFC seems
to fit well with the Xfce philosophy. My proposal is all or nothing. I
would be very happy to see GFC integrated into Xfce, and to help
maintain it. GFC would cease to exist as a separate project and could
be removed from SourceForge at some point. Once GFC was integrated into
Xfce it could be developed in whatever direction was required. I
wouldn't have a problem with that.
More information about the Xfce4-dev