Libraries in trunk
danny_milo at yahoo.com
Sat Feb 3 23:59:16 CET 2007
On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 21:36:51 +0000, Nick Schermer wrote:
> Ok, now 4.4 has been released and the branches are created, it time to
> poke in trunk again.
> What are we going to do with libxfcegui4?
> There were some plans a while ago to split it in libxfce4ui and lib(xfce4)netk. Or drop netk and switch to libwnck.
Splitting into model and view libs seems obvious and leads to cleaner code where it makes sense (i.e. where a "model" part exists)...
> But whatever we do with netk, we probably all agree libxfcegui4
> contains quite some useless (read: also in gtk, sometimes with a
> couple of lines more code) widgets, there are also some widgets that
> need to be moved to the application which uses it (clock code for
Most of the useless widget are already deprecated, we could just nuke them now?
> Personally vote for moving all the 'needed' widgets in libxfce4ui and
> the clock widget to the clock plugin. I think we should keep netk
> around, because libwnck is not a small library (netk will be smaller),
> not much bugs are caused by netk, Gnome's blinking is ugly (IMHO), we
> might change the taskbar behaviour in the near future and netk has
> some improvements that never made it into wnck. It's also easy to
> merge the wnck fixed to netk (I already do this once in a while).
Someone needs to check libwnck if the bloat is correctable / useful.
If we switched to libwnck, it would be one library less to maintain.
On the other hand, netk is one of the libraries where almost no bugs show up, so what's the situation with libwcnk in comparison?
> PS. maybe we can also merge the libs, so it easier to distribute the
You mean the packager merges them? If he wants to, sure...
As for in the version control system, I'd like to make/keep modules separate, small and tidy.
> Maybe libxfce4util, libxfce4ui, libxfce4netk andlibxfce4menu inside 1 package and call it libxfce4 (very original, I know)?
Up to the packager, I'd say...
More information about the Xfce4-dev