1 |
On 27/05/16 10:21 AM, Mart Raudsepp wrote: |
2 |
> [ Snip! ] |
3 |
|
4 |
|
5 |
Agree on all other portions above; its the Applications part below |
6 |
that is most contentious though and is also what I care most about: |
7 |
|
8 |
|
9 |
> * Applications may only use a gtk2 based stack or gtk3 based stack in a |
10 |
> given version/revision. gtk3 is strongly preferred when it is deemed to |
11 |
> not have any regressions compared to gtk2 build, but the choice is |
12 |
> ultimately with the maintainer. Once the application converts to using |
13 |
> gtk3 in our distribution, it should try hard to stay that way in |
14 |
> upcoming versions as well. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> * Some exceptions to the above may exist under heavy consideration, |
17 |
> especially in cases where the toolkit usage is complex and may have |
18 |
> some issues for some, but in general gtk3 support is deemed good by |
19 |
> upstream. Most notable here would be browsers like firefox and |
20 |
> chromium, which are using gtk dependency more for emulating the theme |
21 |
> it uses, rather than using it as its real toolkit. If such exceptions |
22 |
> are allowed, the USE flag naming here must be consistent amongst the |
23 |
> exceptions. My proposal would be USE=force-gtk2 then, as I have no |
24 |
> better ideas without stomping on the USE=gtk{2,3} historical meaning. |
25 |
|
26 |
|
27 |
Personally I don't see an issue at all with maintainers of |
28 |
applications allowing a package to be built against gtk2 instead of |
29 |
gtk3 even if gtk3 is deemed "good enough" by upstream. There are a |
30 |
number of end-users (myself included) that prefer the gtk2 experience |
31 |
over gtk3, and so to me I'd like to not limit what app maintainers |
32 |
want to do, but rather just limit the way they can do it. The |
33 |
'force-gtk2' flag to me seems appropriate for this, especially since |
34 |
this type of choice should explicitly not be linked to a flag in any |
35 |
profiles (and i believe both gtk2 and gtk3 exist in some profile or |
36 |
another). |
37 |
|
38 |
|
39 |
> When arguing in favor of supporting gtk2 builds more for apps, please |
40 |
> do keep in mind that gtk2 really is pretty much dead. And no, MATE, |
41 |
> XFCE and others are NOT continuing its support; they are just slow in |
42 |
> fully converting to gtk3, but they are doing so and I expect both of |
43 |
> those to be fully done this year, around autumn. |
44 |
> If the issue is political or just a general gnome3 or gtk3 hate, then I |
45 |
> would ask you to keep your political opinions or hate outside this |
46 |
> thread and go contemplate on more important life issues. |
47 |
> If the issue is lack of themes, then I would like you to help package |
48 |
> more gtk3 themes. gtk3.20 now has a stable CSS based theme API and |
49 |
> themes shouldn't be breaking anymore beyond this point, theoretically. |
50 |
> And gtk3 theme packages should pretty much just be CSS files and some |
51 |
> metadata. Though we have yet to get over that bumpy thing yet (a main |
52 |
> reason gtk3.20 isn't in main tree yet). |
53 |
|
54 |
|
55 |
As to the death of gtk2, well, despite firefox officially adopting |
56 |
gtk3 as the default in 46.0 there's still a lot of open bugs, some of |
57 |
which have been around for years, and the other mozilla products have |
58 |
barely tried to port their UIs over. I expect it will be 2018 at |
59 |
least before mozilla doesn't officially need gtk2 anymore. Dead |
60 |
upstream or not, I expect there will still be consumers of gtk2 for a |
61 |
few years yet. |