Xfce Foundation Classes 4.3.0-Test1

[Brian J. Tarricone]

Jeff Franks wrote:

> Jasper Huijsmans wrote:
>
>> Brian J. Tarricone wrote:
>>
>>> Benedikt Meurer wrote:
>>>
>>> i know it's a little odd, but any chance we can do libXFC (or 
>>> libXFC4) instead?  every time i look at libxfc, my mind says "hey, 
>>> what happened to the 'e' on the end?"  it bothers me, on a deep 
>>> fundamental level.  ok, not really.  i guess i don't really feel 
>>> strongly about this; i just thought i'd throw it out there.
>>>
> That was  Benedikt's a suggestion, but there is no libxfc or libxfc4, 
> the libs are currently called libxfccore-4.3 and libxfcui-4.3. He felt 
> that one CVS module would be easier to manage than two but there is a 
> reason for two separate modules. Rather than have numerous add-on 
> libraries devloped over time like gfc-gconf (GConf) or gfc-gl 
> (GtkGLExt) I had planned just two modules, a 'core' module which would 
> wrap GLib, possibly GConf and any other non-gui code, and a UI module 
> that would wrap the GUI libraries ATK, GDK, Gdk-Pixbuf, GTK and Pango, 
> possibly GtkGLExt and any other gui code. This way there would only 
> ever be two modules, but if there was the need for a third, or for an 
> application library, the non GUI code would be separate. It would be 
> nice to have  wrappers for GConf and GtkGLExt. I already have to 
> source code, it just needs updating from Inti-GConf and Inti-GL, if I 
> get the time.

Right, right - we're getting a bit off from my request.  Frankly, I 
don't care what you call the libraries, but if you're going to include 
the string "xfc" (without the 'e' at the end), it would be nice if it 
could be "XFC" instead.  so, libXFCcore, or whatever.  That was the only 
point I was trying to make; I don't really care about the -core vs. -ui 
distinction.

    -Brian