From gtk-devel Sat Dec 23 14:06:00 2017 From: Emmanuele Bassi Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2017 14:06:00 +0000 To: gtk-devel Subject: Re: First deprecate APIs and then remove them in the next major version Message-Id: X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=gtk-devel&m=151403797603593 On 23 December 2017 at 13:47, Salvatore De Paolis wrote: > On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 15:08:46 -0800 > Christian Hergert wrote: > >> Ardour could never move to Gtk3 because a number of VST plugins use Gtk2 >> and you cannot mix both into the same process space. DAW authors will >> often cite the necessity for plugins to be in process to allow for a >> large number of tracks/plugins due to context switching. (This is a >> contributing factor to why many DAWs write their own UI toolkits). >> >> As for GIMP, I think the lesson I take away is that we need to recruit >> people to go do the ports for important projects rather than expect them >> to track us. Red Hat has shown that this strategy works in both Firefox >> and LibreOffice (which are arguably the two hardest applications to port). > > > http://libremusicproduction.com/news/20171221-lsp-plugins-version-110-released-farewall-gtk Unsurprisingly, considering that the whole UI is completely custom and using a generic desktop toolkit would have made their lives miserable. > I wonder why GTK+ has not been forked yet. I wonder why you don't keep this kind of statements for yourself; in any case, feel free to fork GTK and figure how why nobody does that. Ciao, Emmanuele. -- https://www.bassi.io [@] ebassi [@gmail.com] _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list