Re: A GNOME Bindings release set?



On Thursday, December 4, 2003, at 03:23 AM, Murray Cumming Comneon com wrote:

We have bindings for several other gnome libraries but will not commit those for gnome 2.6.0. With any luck, we'll have libbonobo bindings in time for 2.8.0.

Excellent. When you know what they will be, could you please give me a list
of the tarball names for these, so I can put them on the list.

will do. of course, the versions will not be finalized until early march; shall i just email you when there are new stable versions available?


Do you have some mechanism in perl for parallel installation of similar
APIs, in case you need to change API for 2.8?

unfortunately, the only way to achieve this in Perl is to install to a different prefix and set your perl library path to look there. that's why gtk2-perl uses the Gtk2 namespace instead of Gtk, like we wanted to do.

we've also discussed this (at great length on irc yesterday for example), as it means that we get one shot. once it's frozen, it's frozen for good. we are taking this very seriously.

the typical way to handle this is to overload functions to retain support for their old call signatures, e.g. add new parameters on the end, have funky arg parsing based on argument count, and so on. this is not a lot of fun to maintain or use, so part of our work for the next three months is finishing our regression test suite and exercising every new API before it gets committed to ensure it is bound correctly the first time.

beyond that, the only API changes we'll allow are additions and bugfixes (the kind where it doesn't matter that we changed it, because before the change it didn't work at all).



honestly, what i'd be most worried about in terms of parallel installs and such is avoiding the redhat/pygtk syndrome. i once tried installing meld on redhat 8.0; it wouldn't run because it required something in pygtk 1.99.15, but the system had only 1.99.14. turns out the upgrade broke all of redhat's gui config tools. whose fault is this? pygtk's, for breaking compatibility? or redhat's for not using an unbreakable private installation of pygtk to some separate prefix for critical system components?

--
muppet <scott at asofyet dot org>




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]