[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gtk-devel
Subject:    Re: First deprecate APIs and then remove them in the next major version
From:       Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi () gmail ! com>
Date:       2017-12-23 14:06:00
Message-ID: CALnHYQGimZxTLxzQ0uowCnD-y8w5jT-cNTUfO+-Ckrk0FpiD1Q () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 23 December 2017 at 13:47, Salvatore De Paolis <iwkse-ml@gmx.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 15:08:46 -0800
> Christian Hergert <christian@hergert.me> 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
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]