Integrating GFC into Xfce

[Jeff Franks]

There doesn't seem to be any disagreement with integrating GFC into Xfce 
so I should get started. I do want this integration to succeed so I 
prepared to go out of my way (by compromizing) to make it so. There are 
over 1000 GFC source files to rebrand. That is a lot of text search and 
replace, as well as a manual check later of each file, so I only want to 
do it once. Before I can get started there are some things I need to 
know so could I hear your ideas on the following

1. How should GFC be integrated into Xfce? Should the rebranded binding 
be a separate module that installs into a separate base directory from 
'xfce4'.

If it should then perhaps the rebranded binding should have its own name 
as well, such as 'Xfce Foudation Classes' or 'Xfce Developement 
Platform' or something else. If it shouldn't then a separate name wont 
be needed. There would just be two new Xfce modules, one that wraps GLib 
and one that wraps GTK+, that install into the 'xfce4' base directory.

2. Should the rebranded binding follow the GTK+ or Xfce4 version numbers.

If the binding follows the Xfce4 version numbers the GLib and GTK+ 
wrappers would only be updated with each new desktop environment 
release. This would mean that if there had been no Xfce release for some 
time the GLib/GTK+ binding would not be up to date and users wouldn't 
have access to newer GTK widgets. My initial thought is that following 
the GTK+ version numbers would be best. Xfce wont actually use the 
binding itself so there is no real need for the binding's version 
numbers to be tied to the desktop enviroment's.

3. What to call the new Xfce modules? The current GFC modules are called 
GFC-Core which wraps GLib and GFC-UI which wraps ATK/GDK/GTK/Pango.

The new module names could be something like Xfce-GLib and Xfce-GTK, or 
XfGLib and XfGTK.

4. I will change the sig_clicked() like function names to 
signal_clicked(), as mentioned previously.

Let me know if you have any other thoughts.
Jeff Franks.