[Geany-Devel] RFC: Policy for Glade File Updates

[Thomas Martitz]

Lex Trotman <elextr at gmail.com> schrieb:
>On 6 October 2013 22:21, Thomas Martitz <
>thomas.martitz at student.htw-berlin.de> wrote:
>
>> Am 03.10.2013 02:00, schrieb Lex Trotman:
>>
>>
>>>     Is there a problem with this approach?
>>>
>>>
>>> That means when the minimum version of GTK is increased we will have
>to
>>> upgrade to version of Glade that supports the new widgets that come
>with
>>> the new GTK.  And then apply the fixes.  So along with lack of
>windows
>>> maintenance (please lets deprecate it) we now have Glade upgrade
>issues
>>> slowing the movement of GTK versions.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Ok I see you try to avoid anything which could possible mean more
>> maintenance work, even if only in theory :)
>>
>> Anyway, the glade version needs only to be updated if we also make
>use of
>> newer widgets _and_ don't implement them programmatically. This seems
>like
>> a very rare event, and even then applying fixes is as easy as git
>rebase.
>> For the vast majority of time our set-in-stone, fixed Glade can be
>used
>> without extra effort.
>>
>> But you need to see it from another POV: Doing this enables us, and
>more
>> importantly new and fresh contributors, to use Glade for the Geany
>UI. This
>> clearly outweighs the very little extra maintenance effort. And I
>would
>> argue that this even reduces maintenance effort overall since we
>don't have
>> to worry about geany.xml anymore.
>>
>>
>Well, I am wondering how much change is going to happen to the UI
>within
>the life of Geany on 2.x?  But if you think there are major changes to
>be
>made then I understand the attraction of using Glade rather than
>editing
>XML (shudder).
>
>Its not just using different versions either, some versions of Glade
>seem
>to delight in producing noise no matter how little you do :(
>
>So I guess the first step would be for you to identify a Glade version
>that
>produces a file that both GTK2 and GTK3 Geany correctly read and that
>doesn't produce lots of noise each change.  Then you need to make the
>modifications you mentioned.
>
>Without knowing that such a Glade exists the whole question is
>theoretical
>:)
>
>If it exists then its certainly a possible solution.
>
>Cheers
>Lex
>
>
>
>
>>
>> Best regards.
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> 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>
>>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Devel mailing list
>Devel at lists.geany.org
>https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel

I thought we already determined such a version (3.8.1?) which gets it almost right except for the icon-names issue?

Best regards
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.geany.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20131006/9f4bedad/attachment.html>