Integrating GFC into Xfce
benedikt.meurer at unix-ag.uni-siegen.de
Tue Oct 12 17:49:01 CEST 2004
Jeff Franks wrote:
> 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
Dunno what you mean by 'separate base directory', but here's what I'd
Header files go to $includedir/xfce4/gfc/ (.pc files need to be adjusted)
Libraries go to $libdir/ using libgfc<xx>-<major-version>.<suffix> for
the file names, see http://www106.pair.com/rhp/parallel.html for the reason.
(pkg-config files to $libdir/pkgconfig as usual, data files to $datadir,
> 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.
I'd vote for using 'Xfce Foundation Classes' to make it clear, that its
part of Xfce, not Gnome (most people think Gxx -> Gnome). So it should
read XFC instead of GFC (IMHO).
> 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.
I don't have any strong opinion here, but until now, our policy was to
choose one Gtk+ release as target for the stable versions (2.0 for 4.0,
2.2 for 4.2, etc.). Maybe GFC/XFC should also follow this policy for
> 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.
I think Xfce-Core and Xfce-UI are ok, where Xfce-Core wraps glib and
libxfce4util, and Xfce-UI wraps the Gtk/Gdk/etc. stuff and libxfcegui4.
> Jeff Franks.
More information about the Xfce4-dev