[Gtk-sharp-list] Re: 2.8 Platform Bindings - invitation

Murray Cumming murrayc@murrayc.com
Tue, 23 Mar 2004 20:20:41 +0100


On Tue, 2004-03-23 at 18:45, Mike Kestner wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-03-21 at 06:41, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > The 2.5/2.6 GNOME Platform Bindings seem to be a success so far.
> 
> Congratulations to you and the other binding maintainers.
> 
> > So I invite new projects to join the GNOME Platform Bindings schedule
> > for the 2.7/2.8 (and future) release cycle, which will last
> > approximately 6 months. First tarballs will probably be due in the
> > middle of April. Bindings maintainers should tell us what source
> > tarballs they plan to put on the schedule. 
> 
> Unfortunately, this doesn't look possible.    We are locked into the
> Gnome-2.2 platform through June,

Why?

>  our anticipated first stable release. 
> I don't think it will take much effort to update to the 2.7 API, but I
> can't afford any distractions from the 2.2 API until it's released.  I'm
> pretty much certain at this point that I won't be tracking 2.7 in
> mid-April.
> 
> > Bindings should follow these rules:
> > http://developer.gnome.org/dotplan/bindings/rules.html
> 
> I also have not been convinced of the need to fragment the binding
> between Platform and Desktop libraries.  As I'm not willing to do this,
> apparently the timing issue is moot anyway.
> 
> As a project, GNOME releases the Platform and Desktop package sets
> simultaneously.  The two package sets are atomic enough for me to target
> Gtk# against, and it's easier for me and my users to deal with one
> package instead of two. That's what I plan to continue doing at this
> point.

The separation has to do with API-stability, not timing. But I am
willing to talk about this if you can get in-sync with GNOME 2.7. But if
you can not then it's not worth discussing.

I hope you manage it for 2.next. As a first step it would have helped
you to do regular release according to the 2.5 schedule, as planned. I
encourage you to do that for 2.7.

Thanks for the clear reply.

-- 
Murray Cumming
www.murrayc.com
murrayc@murrayc.com