[Gtk-sharp-list] gphoto2 bindings

Rodrigo Moya rodrigo@ximian.com
27 Dec 2002 00:09:41 +0100

On Thu, 2002-12-26 at 14:53, Martin Baulig wrote:
> Mike Kestner <mkestner@speakeasy.net> writes:
> > On Wed, 2002-12-25 at 19:09, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > > Hi
> > > 
> > > I just committed to CVS the libgphoto2 bindings. as requested by Miguel.
> > > They are based on current CVS sources (2.1.2dev1).
> > > 
> > > I am sorry for not sending a patch first, but I just realized it after I
> > > did the commit, so please flame me :-(
> > 
> > Shouldn't need any asbestos underware for this.  
> > 
> > I should've responded to Miguel's initial mail about this to express my
> > opinion, but I don't think this library is general purpose enough to be
> > included in Gtk#. 
> Hi,
> well, I think the big problem here is that we're getting more and more dependencies into
> gtk# which makes things really complicated for people who're just using gtk# and none of
> these additional libraries.
all are conditionally built, so I think that shouldn't be a problem. For
packages, just creating separated packages for each extra assembly with
the extra dependencies should be enough.

Of course, I still agree in not having not-general-purpose libs in GTK#.

> This also applies to people who're making binary packages: sure we can create a separate
> binary package for each of these additional libraries, but we're ending up getting a
> really large source package wich must obviously depend on all of them.
> I was already a bit worried as gnome-db was included in gtk#, but didn't say anything
> because I thought that this'd be the last and only one.
heh, gnome-db hasn't been the latest one, there have been a few others
added after gnome-db, such as GConf, GStreamer, AFAIR.

I think, apart from gphoto, which clearly is a special case, the current
libs in GTK# make a lot of sense, since they offer a complete framework
for GNOME# apps. Maybe, it should be reanamed to GNOME# ? :-)

Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo@ximian.com>