Re: State of gtk head for win32, was Re: GIOChannel diff committed

[Hans Breuer <hans breuer org>]

At 18:11 25.07.01 -0400, Andrew J. Lanoix wrote:
>--On Wednesday, July 25, 2001 9:29 PM +0200 Hans Breuer <hans breuer org> 
>wrote:
>> [...]
>> Currently the only makefiles actively maintained in CVS are the
>> msvc makefiles, but it should be simple to adapt the required
>> changes to the mingw makefiles (I've recently done it for the
>> glib build, with a simpler approach to built dlls, than the
>> original one)
>Ok, that is news to me. I'll let you (Hans) worry about the mingw makfile 
>problem. We still have to deal with education problem relating to it.
>
I don't really worry about them because I have a msvc license ...

>> IMHO the best way to get information on the status of any project
>> in GNOME CVS is to read the ChangeLog. Guess for what name you may
>> want to search to get the win32 specific status ...
>> But 'win32' would work too.
>Yes I did that but it doesn't answer my question. Which is: Should people 
>still be recommended to use the production branch or head?
>
Do you know of any application already ported to Gtk HEAD ?
I tried to convince the Dia developers to create a branch for it 
some times; with absolutely no success.
There is currently a related discussion on gimp-devel but no decision yet.

Is the Gtk+2.0 API already frozen and/or are there huge breaking patches
pending.

My conclusion: No, the win32 developers which aren't able to compile CVS
head (and fixing issues which almost always arise, like missing export
definitions, broken makefiles, ...) should definitely stick with
'gtk-1-3-win32-production' for a while.

	Hans

-------- Hans "at" Breuer "dot" Org -----------
Tell me what you need, and I'll tell you how to 
get along without it.                -- Dilbert