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

List:       gtkmm
Subject:    Re: Replacing Gtk::Action and Gtk::UIManager with Gio::Action and Gtk::Builder
From:       Murray Cumming <murrayc () murrayc ! com>
Date:       2013-09-27 8:33:18
Message-ID: 1380270798.1777.3.camel () localhost ! localdomain
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, 2013-09-26 at 22:45 +0200, Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
> 2013/9/26 Murray Cumming <murrayc@murrayc.com>:
> > because we cannot yet break the ABI to add Gtk::Actionable as a base
> > class for several classes:
> > https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtkmm/commit/?id=3381c0aea10891a2dccc49b5e450fd497a3cb807
> 
> FWIW:
> From my perspective, it would be far more desirable to have complete
> and high quality C++ bindings which break the ABI more often than
> GTK+, rather than to have incomplete bindings which keep the ABI.

I understand, but there are huge practical difficulties when we break
the ABI, doing a parallel-installable version of gtkmm. It would take
about 2 years for packages to get into the major distros, and another
year for applications to start using it. This would create work for us
and generally annoy people.

We've seen this with the gtkmm-2.0 to gtkmm-2.4 transition and with the
GTK+-2.0 to GTK+-3.0 (and gtkmm) transitions.

I think it's not worth it until there are more major issues that we
would fix.

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

_______________________________________________
gtkmm-list mailing list
gtkmm-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list

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