Re: GNOME CVS: gtk+ yosh

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

Manish Singh <yosh gimp org> writes:

> On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 01:09:22PM -0400, jacob berkman wrote:
> > On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 15:10, Gnome CVS User wrote:
> > > CVSROOT:	/cvs/gnome
> > > Module name:	gtk+
> > > Changes by:	yosh	02/10/07 15:10:39
> > 
> > > Log message:
> > > Mon Oct  7 11:59:33 2002  Manish Singh  <yosh gimp org>
> > > 
> > > * gtk/gtkliststore.[ch] gtk/gtktreedatalist.[ch] gtk/gtktreednd.c
> > > gtk/gtktreemodel.[ch] gtk/gtktreemodelsort.[ch]
> > > gtk/gtktreeselection.[ch] gtk/gtktreesortable.[ch]
> > > gtk/gtktreestore.[ch]: Deprecation cleanup
> > 
> > this has broken compilation of gconf-editor, which uses GTK_CHECK_CAST()
> > after including gtktreemodel.h (which are no longer defined after just
> > including that file).
> > 
> > should these headers include the header which supplies those macros, or
> > should it just be fixed in gconf-editor?
> 
> gconf-editor should be using the GObject equivalents.
> 
> But, what is the policy on maintaining individual header file compatibility
> for the 2.x series? Is including bits of gtk headers by external projects
> supported? If so, I'll revert that bit of the header file change.

I think you need to revert it; I personally dislike the policy 
of allowing any header file to be included, since it means you can't
do most header file reorganization, but we can't change it now.

Can you file a bug to deprecate all unecessary includes of gtktypeutils.h
for 2.4 in bugzilla? (Our policy is no additional 
#ifndef GTK_DISABLE_DEPRECATED for 2.4)

(We perhaps should also consider whether we can deprecate some or
all of the remaining stuff in gtktypeutils.h for 2.4.)

Regards,
                                       Owen