[Gtk-sharp-list] Towards GTK# 3.0

Mike Kestner mkestner at gmail.com
Sat Jul 28 08:08:10 UTC 2012

Hi Bertrand,

On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Bertrand Lorentz
<bertrand.lorentz at gmail.com> wrote:

> When I tried to run the Banshee GTK3 branch, the main issue I hit was
> in fact a regression in GTK+ itself:
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=679232
> I guess it's a good sign about the state of the bindings themselves. ;)

I think the binding itself is in pretty good shape, and has been for a
while now.  There were a few tweaks needed for the Banshee port.  MD
would be another good test, but I doubt you will talk anyone into a v3
port of it.

> So I think we should try to push out a 2.99.0 release as soon as
> possible. Of course, it needs to be marked as beta, and targeted for
> applications developpers to start porting their apps and maybe provide
> feedback.
> What you guys think still needs to be done for that release, and
> before a proper 3.0 release ?

I guess it depends on who your target is for a 2.99.0 release.  To
make Gtk# 3 a replacement for Gtk# 2.12 going forward, a 3.0 release
would ideally also provide:

API Documentation:  the api docs have been stubbed for the new API,
but none of it has been filled in.  I know that's not exactly a
showstopper compared to 2.12.  There would need to be a plan for how
to distribute the stubs, though.  The monodoc viewer doesn't include
v3 docs.  Integrating with the on-line docs would require coordination
with the go-mono.com owner or a new provider.

Porting Guide: Most people who are interested in 3.0 seem to be
wanting to remove a 2.x dependency in existing applications.  I
haven't heard of anyone clamoring for the new APIs in 3.0, because to
my (albeit limited) knowledge, there isn't much new capability.  Most
of the interest seems to be related to inclusion in a linux
distribution or desktop app set, and being current and supported and
not dead 'n stuff.  So having some documentation on how to port would
likely be valuable.

Installers:  If you release a 2.99 without windows and mac installers,
I would expect the first question that will come in will be "When will
the windows installer be ready?"  Maybe I'm wrong about this, though,
since most of the interest in v3 seems to be Gnome3 and linux
distribution driven.

MD/Stetic support: given the porting focus of existing apps, and their
limited reliance on stetic, maybe this isn't a big issue.  But the
existing MD designer will not allow you to develop Gtk# 3 apps.  It
may be a challenging problem to solve, given that MD is a 2.12 app.
Might be a fun hack if someone has the itch.

Those are the main things that demoralized me from pursuing this in my
own spare time.  :-)  I wish you guys luck.  I'm willing to answer
questions and maybe fix a bug or two along the way if it would help.

Mike Kestner

More information about the Gtk-sharp-list mailing list