[Geany-Devel] Don't pop-up messages/steal focus when in terminal

[Lex Trotman]

My experience based on my consulting customers is that they run old
versions or Red Hat mostly, with only security updates added.  Even point
releases are viewed with suspicion, that is likely to mean they have to
hire me to re-compile their crusty old business apps to new libraries since
their own devs don't understand them. :)


On 21 April 2013 05:13, Matthew Brush <mbrush at codebrainz.ca> wrote:

> On 13-04-20 09:52 AM, Nick Treleaven wrote:
>
>> On 20/04/2013 16:06, Matthew Brush wrote:
>>
>>> On 13-04-20 05:59 AM, Harold Aling wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Lex Trotman <elextr at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Agree with Thomas, we should go to 2.24 for windows since we supply the
>>>>> bundle, Linux doesn't need to go so far, for eg what GTK did the
>>>>> current red
>>>>> hat and suse enterprise versions release with, expect 2.18 or 2.20.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I might be stepping completely out of line with this remark: Do people
>>>> with dusty old GTK's use bleeding edge Geany?
>>>>
>>>
Yes


>
>>> It is rumored that some percentage (remember 0 is a percent :) of users
>>> are apparently stuck on ancient enterprise distros at work, need to use
>>> the latest bleeding edge Geany at all times, and are able install it but
>>> not GTK+ from source into $HOME. Or so the story goes :)
>>>
>>
Nobody knows how, let alone is allowed, to modify such fundamental
software, even in their own home dir.


>
>> I imagine building newer GTK/GLib from source with only old dependencies
>> would be a pain in the arse, having to grab and build all the newer
>> dependencies too. It's also a pain for most users to install and manage
>> multiple versions of libraries. Geany is actually very easy to build as
>> it only requires Gtk/GLib.
>>
>>
> It is a pain, but I'm more skeptical about what percentage of users are in
> this situation. Just thinking about the specific criteria you'd have to
> meet to be in this minority of users:
>
> * Running old but still supported enterprise distro
>

tick


> * No ability/access to install a separate system GTK+
>

tick, tick


> * Aren't satisfied with the Geany in the repos
>

0.18 or older, no way, tick


> * Need to run the absolute latest Geany from release or Git
>

Release yes, tick


> * Aren't willing to compile/install GTK+ stack into $HOME but are for
> Geany, but not for most other popular GTK+ software which requires newer
> GTK+.
>

You already said that, tick again


>
> Or, in the case of Windows:
>
> * Need to run absolute latest Geany from release or Git
>

Release yes tick


> * Required to have a specific old system-wide GTK+
>

It will be whatever we bundle, each app has its own bundle


> * Unable to install a newer GTK+ specifically for Geany or
>

Whats a GTK?


> * Unwilling to used the bundled GTK+ that comes with Geany
>

Well, its bundled, so thats it


> * Not using lots of other GTK+ software that requires newer GTK+
>

Whats a GTK?

For windows there is less of a problem since we, and every other app,
supply a bundle including GTK.  So the windows release can go to 2.24 (the
new recommended release) without too much pain.


>
> So for some possibly insignificant number of Geany users (possibly even
> approaching 0 users), who still technically have a path to use latest
> Geany, albeit with some hassle (building GTK stack), we
> (contributors/developers) have to:
>

The path of building GTK does not exist in corporate, it is not allowed,
and web app designers don't know how to do it.



>
> * Quadruple check every GTK+ function we call, referring to out of date
> documentation in some cases, to ensure we don't use API from the last 4
> years or
>

tick


> * Ensure all new code using API from the last 4 years is #if'd-out so that
> they work with both latest and ancient GTK+.
>

tick


> * Maintain more stuff in the gtkcompat.h header to fake out a bunch of
> core and plugin code so we can also build against latest GTK+.
>

tick


> * Have a separate old GTK+ on our dev. machines besides modern ones to
> test all changes against (although I don't do this personally).
>

no, but the nightly does for us,


>
> IMO, the benefits to current and potential contributors and users of
> updating to a relatively modern min. GTK+ 2 version outweighs the negatives
> to some unknown small percentage of users.
>

Well, who knows what percentage?  We are talking real users, they will not
be on this list, and might not be on the user list.  They just use
software, they are not involved with it like we are.


>
> Even Puppy Linux has had GTK+ 2.24 for the last two releases[1].
>

And that is irrelevant, a more effective question is, what does Red Hat 6.0
have?  (thats a real question, my quick look at their website couldn't
identify what it is)

Red Hat 6.0, released in 2010, is still currently in its phase one support
and is still considered bleeding edge by many corporates, Red Hat 5.0 is
still supported but is outside its phase one so I think its safe to ignore
it now.


Cheers
Lex


> </rant>
>
> Cheers,
> Matthew Brush
>
> [1] http://distrowatch.com/table.**php?distribution=puppy<http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=puppy>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.geany.org
> https://lists.geany.org/cgi-**bin/mailman/listinfo/devel<https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.geany.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130421/cf066748/attachment.html>