Re: Notes and thoughts on the GTK+ meeting at GUADEC

[Alberto Ruiz <aruiz gnome org>]

2009/8/19 Kristian Rietveld <kris gtk org>:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Alberto Ruiz<aruiz gnome org> wrote:
>> 2009/8/14 Kristian Rietveld <kris gtk org>:
>> As for theming, I've been discussing a bit with Thomas, Carlos and
>> Cody. We have reached some sort of consensus that a backwards
>> compatible path is possible adding a second vtable for engines,
>> checking the vtable size and working out a structured way to poke the
>> scene graph representation. However, we need time to try these things
>> out. Thomas pointed out that working on a separate theming library
>> makes a lot of sense as it would allow reaching a nice API and it
>> would help the special purpose GObject baed toolkits around to have
>> proper theming as well (say Nbtk, Glitter...).
>>
>> So I think that we've reached the conclusion that theming shouldn't
>> get in the way of the current 3.0 plans, as we don't have time to
>> deprecate GtkStyle and introduce something new all at once
>> (eventhough, we all would have loved to make it).
>
> Great to know that progress is being made here.  Trying things out
> definitely sounds like a good idea.  Even though we are now not
> planning to deprecate GtkStyle in 3.0, we should have an idea whether
> "just sealing it" will provide enough flexibility to migrate to
> "something new" at a later stage. I think one of the larger problems
> has been the hard-coded array sizes of the arrays containing GdkColors
> and GdkGCs (but I am not at all an expert on GtkStyle and theming),
> and this limitation should disappear in a properly written accessor
> function.  Are there more pitfalls that can hold us off from a
> successful migration in the future?