Subject: RE: commit -- libglade support
From: Sprague, ITSN (spraguee@msc.naples.navy.mil)
Date: Thu Feb 08 2001 - 11:19:55 CST
Well, I'm no core-team hacker, just a lurker, but IMexceptionallyHO, it
seems to me like glade should be shelved temporarily, at least until
libglade uses libxml2, rather than libxml1. This might also be the requisite
excuse to 86 expat under UNIX (if doing this is in fact desirable...) As for
the AIX/IRIX problem, I don't know AIX or IRIX any too well, but how hard
would it be to port libglade to them (I'm not suggesting that we do this,
just maybe make it a feature request to the glade folks).
Maybe I'm just talking through my hat, but it seems to me like adding glade
at this point falls squarely into the 'U-gly hack' category...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dom Lachowicz [mailto:cinamod@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 5:15 PM
> To: cuenca@celium.net; abiword-dev@abisource.com
> Subject: RE: commit -- libglade support
>
>
> >what feature? just wondering, what gives you the right to
> veto the change?
> >I would understand that if there are many +1 to kick this
> feature, it has
> >to
> >be kicked, but this veto history is stupid.
> >
> >Do I have the right to veto your veto?
>
> Funny, I don't remeber this Apache voting system thing being
> accepted at
> all, actually, or even who would say if it had been accepted.
> Even if you
> limit the voting members to those in CREDITS.TXT, some 120
> people have not
> responded to this email. If you then further factor in those
> people who are
> still at least minorly active in the project, there are like
> 15-20 people
> who haven't voted... it seems unfair to disenfranchise them
> or to speak for
> them - if we are to implement this system.
>
> The implementation of glade and the Apache voting system was
> premature,
> IMvHO. I find it amusing how there was a week-long discussion
> before we
> changed bool in the tree with much voting and lots of
> intelligent exchanges
> going on, but none before glade. bool didn't break the tree.
> bool didn't
> require gettext. bool didn't break AIX... I hope I'm getting
> my (ironic)
> point across.
>
> Dom
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Thu Feb 08 2001 - 11:25:46 CST