On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:55:04 -0400, John Bailey wrote
> Mark Doliner wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 00:43:01 -0400, John Bailey wrote
> >> I'm certainly not intending to suggest we completely ignore .NET 
> >> simply because of these issues, but MFC does gain us the advantage 
> >> of working on Windows NT 4.0, Windows 98, and Windows ME
> > 
> > I don't think we should worry very much about supporting operating systems
> > that have been obsolete for over 6 years, and not supported by Microsoft for 2
> > years.
> 
> By that same token, GTK+ 2.0.x was last released on 2002-11-20 and 
> has gone unsupported by its developers for quite some time.  GTK+ 
> 2.2.x was last released on 2003-09-04 and GTK+ 2.4.x was last 
> released on 2004-10-12.  Both of these have also been unsupported by 
> the developers for quite some time.  All of these GTK+ releases are 
> obsolete, yet we still support them, when supporting them gains us 
> little except more of a mess of preprocessor directives in our code 
> to disable or work around things that don't work with these older 
> GTK+ versions.
> 
> If we're going to actively ignore supporting a product (whose 
> support would come mostly for free by using compilers that are 
> readily available, such as mingw, and not going overboard to add 
> crazy stupid stuff like the official IM clients do) simply because 
> the developers no longer support it, then we should drop support for 
> anything older than GTK+ 2.6.0 (which I have stated my desire for on 
> numerous occasions), and more likely 2.8.0.

I'm in favor of dropping support for GTK+ older than 2.6.0, and more likely 2.8.0.

-Mark

_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@pidgin.im
http://pidgin.im/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel