Re: libart_lgpl + glib: possible?

On Mon, 2004-03-15 at 15:29, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
> A Seg, 2004-03-15 às 09:45, Alexander Larsson escreveu:
> > On Sun, 2004-03-14 at 23:03, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
> > >   There is a problem with libart as it is.  It is not language-binding
> > > friendly, since none of its types are GType registered.
> > > 
> > >   In gnome-python we have come accross this problem more than once. 
> > > First with the gnomeprint bindings, now also users complain that they
> > > cannot use gnome.canvas.BPath, because the 'bpath' property is of type
> > > pointer.
> > > 
> > >   We desperately need to add a glib dependency to libart_lgpl.  Will
> > > that be a problem?  Or is it nothing but another political war?
> > 
> > libart is not in active development anymore, and is scheduled for
> > replacement by Cairo. The numerical stability issues in libart make it
> > to not a good base for future graphical library work.
>   Glad to hear that.  However, exactly when will Cairo replace libart? 
> If in gnome 2.8, then I'll forget about it.  If later, I think it's
> worth it, if the gnome community accepts it.  I have most code ready and
> everything, because of gnomeprint python bindings...

I have no idea. But do we really want to change libart now, potentially
destabilizing it more, and potentially getting more users of a
problematic library?

>   Anyway, doesn't the API compatibility requirement prevent libart from
> ever being removed until gnome 3.0?

It won't be removed. Just deprecated and never changed.

 Alexander Larsson                                            Red Hat, Inc 
                   alexl redhat com    alla lysator liu se 
He's a benighted neurotic matador who hides his scarred face behind a mask. 
She's a foxy paranoid wrestler trying to make a difference in a man's world. 
They fight crime! 

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