[Thunar-dev] Unification of Treeview and Sidepanel
Brian J. Tarricone
bjt23 at cornell.edu
Mon May 16 19:10:58 CEST 2005
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote:
> Brian, I mostly agree with your point about keeping compatibility
> with old distros, but I'm slightly concerned about infrastructure.
> To be short, why keep "duplicate" (note the quotes) infrastructure,
> if efforts are being made to make gtk+ more complete? Why make
> libexo growing unnecessarily when there are native widgets in gtk?
It's not unnecessary if we want to maintain compatibility with gtk
2.4, which I think is worthwhile.
> IMVHO, instead to make modified xfce-only versions of widgets and
> infrastructure, it would be better help the GTK dudes to implement
> properly the features they are moving to the toolkit. Less code to
> maintain, more consistency (think language bindings), better in the
> long run. You can even consider to move libexo stuff to GTK :).
For the backports, this point is moot. For stuff like
XfceAboutDialog, we have a distinctive look for our dialog, which is
different from gtk's. It has nothing to do with a "lack" of
functionality in gtk, it's just that we're different. As for getting
stuff into gtk itself, I personally don't have the time (or the
interest) to engage in that kind of advocacy. If someone else wants
to take something like that on, they're more than welcome.
> I'd like to hear comments. What do you guys think?
> Thank you
> 2005/5/13, Brian J. Tarricone <bjt23 at cornell.edu>:
>>> For example,
>>> 1) GtkCellRenderText, GtkLabel, GtkProgressBar and PangoLayout
>>> support for ellipsized text.
>> Useful, but not necessary, and libexo can do all this.
>>> 3) GtkAboutDialog vs XfceAboutDialog
>> We'll continue to use XfceAboutDialog, since it's distinctively
>>> 4) GLib's GOption API for user defined commandline option
>> This is a shame not to have, but we can either backport it into
>> libexo (not that hard), or just use GNU getopt (and include it
>> for systems that don't have it).
>>> 6) GtkMenuToolButton vs XfceMenuButton
>> So? We already have a replacement for it, so we might as well
>> use it.
>>> May be then a few widgets could be deprecated in favour of the
>>> new GTK ones (e.g. GtkMenuToolButton, GtkAboutDialog).
>> I don't really see the need...
>> I think the bottom line here is that I still haven't seen a
>> compelling need for gtk 2.6 for Thunar.
> _______________________________________________ Thunar-dev mailing
> list Thunar-dev at xfce.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Thunar-dev