Re: GTK+ 2.12 schedule?

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 15:25 +0100, Michael Natterer wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 15:17 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 15:01 +0100, Kristian Rietveld wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 01:45:11PM +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > > > Could we agree on a schedule for GTK+ 2.12, please? I'd really like to
> > > 
> > > Since nobody complained about the schedule we devised at FOSDEM and I mailed
> > > to the list in my minutes a few weeks ago, I guess that will be our
> > > current working schedule.
> > > 
> > > > know for sure that it will be ready for GNOME 2.20.
> > > 
> > > I personally object to guaranteeing that GTK+ 2.12 will be ready in time
> > > for GNOME 2.20.  Yes, we should try to stick to a schedule everybody
> > > agrees with, but I don't want to rush out a release to be ready in time
> > > for GNOME 2.20,
> > 
> > Please let's try. It would be shame to have two GNOME releases with no
> > new GTK+ features.
> 
> It would be a shame to ship a broken GTK+ just because GNOME needs it,
> just as it happened before. The goal should IMHO be to ship a GTK+
> that is as polished as possible within reasonable time, and *not*
> to follow external release cycles that are partly driven by commercial
> issues.

That seems randomly anti-commerce to me. GNOME's release cycle isn't
driven by commercial issues. It's an attempt to ship what is ready if
it's ready, and to generally coordinate with other projects. GTK+ could
use a similar strategy, I believe, though I agree that GTK+ bugs are far
more critical than gnome-games  bugs.

So trying doesn't mean that we'd have to ship a broken GTK+. But GNOME
would decide quite soon whether they think GTK+ is likely to manage it,
and I don't think you need to worry about them being too optimistic.  

> > My own eccentric reason for really wanting this is that I can't add API
> > to gtkmm without a new 2.12 release, and I can't do that without a GTK+
> > 2.12 release, or things will get confusingly out-of-sync.
> 
> Where is the difference to GTK+ 2.10 depending on GLIB 2.12
> and Pango 1.14 ?

gtkmm 2.x not wrapping stuff from GTK+ 2.x would be confusing. That's
not GTK+'s fault. I'm just saying that that's what's important to me.

-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com