Re: CVS reorg
- From: Martin Baulig <martin home-of-linux org>
- To: Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>
- Cc: Tim Janik <timj gtk org>, Gtk+ Developers <gtk-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: CVS reorg
- Date: 02 Apr 2001 18:42:59 +0200
Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com> writes:
> Tim Janik <timj gtk org> writes:
>
> > can one of you in the CVS repo please do the following:
> >
> > copy glib/gobject/gbsearcharray.[hc] to glib/gbsearcharray.[hc]
> > copy glib/gobject recursively to glib/gruntime
> > copy glib/gmain.[hc] to glib/gruntime/glib/gmain.[hc]
> >
> > i'll handle include files/build setup stuff after that.
>
> Before we go ahead and do this, let me ask once more, do
> we really want to go with the s/gobject/gruntime/ change?
Eeeek, NOOOOOOOOOOOO !
Why the hell do you guys want to rename GObject to something else ?
> - We'll confuse people; think how long people kept on
> talking about GTK+-1.4. People recognize gobject
> and know what it is at this point.
>
> - gruntime is an ugly name.
So can someone please enlighten me here, do you just want to rename the
directory/library `gobject' to something else or do you also want to
rename the GObject type and the g_object_* () function names ?
> - Once we start moving stuff into gruntime like the main
> loop, its not really clear where the boundary is,
> and possibly a separate library for gobject just
> doesn't make sense.
>
> What's is the precise definition of what belongs in
> one library and what belongs in the other?
Guys, please don't start doing the same kind of "mess" we had in GTK+ 1.x
where there was no clear boundary between the object model and the widget
set.
We're currently in a situation where GObject as an object system may become
useful for non-GNOME and even non-Gtk projects; and IMHO this will loose a
lot of its value if we move stuff like the main loop into gobject.
--
Martin Baulig
martin gnome org (private)
baulig suse de (work)
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]