Subject: Re: commit -- libglade support
From: Martin Sevior (msevior@mccubbin.ph.unimelb.edu.au)
Date: Fri Feb 09 2001 - 06:12:23 CST
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Sam TH wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 07:07:13PM +0100, Joaquin Cuenca Abela wrote:
>
> Since everyone seems to want to be reasonable about this, how's this
> sound for an idea:
>
> 1. We revert the glade changes on the main tree.
> 2. We create a cvs branch (called glade-list).
> 3. Joaquin commits his changes on the branch.
> 4. Our illustirious list hackers work on the branch until they get a
> working dialog.
> 5. The changes (minus the glade stuff) is merged back to the main
> tree.
>
> This allows for (1) Easy work on the dialog and (2) no interference
> with anything else.
>
> Any objections?
>
If Joaquin is happy with this I'll go along. However I don't think we need
such a branch because all the Unix developers (now including Aaron) have
glade installed. Only a total masochistic would design a dialog without
doing a bit of glade work first.
Once the dialog is done and we're happy with it we'll ungladify it and
remove glade as GTK dependency. It would be nice to keep the libglade
framework in the tree though. It really does make writing dialogs and
especially maintaining them much easier. Joaquin's libglade patch is
really cool.
Cheers
Martin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Fri Feb 09 2001 - 06:12:40 CST