On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 19:36 +0100, Maciej Katafiasz wrote: > Anything besides obvious "it needs to be distributed separately" thing? > Does the fact that engines are compiled binaries ever cause compat > problems?
There are always going to be compat issues, binary or not. You either have a binary API or a string API, or some other API, that will require compatibility on some level. > On a related note, there was one (vague, but nevertheless very > desirable) point on GTK+ 2.8 TODO list: "now we have cairo and all the > goodness, make theme engine that would be far more flexible and allow us > to specify declaratively what's currently being done via engines, fix > all the currect shortcomings of theming and then get rid of all other > engines". Is that still on radar, or got slipped into some unspecified > future? I personally don't care if metacity gets engines or not. It seems to do well enough without them for now. However, I am very against removing them from GTK+. There's nothing special that cairo gives us, that would make removing the ability to have engines, any more possible than it is now. In fact, I would prefer that they get extended, so that new widgets can specify custom drawing routines. Sometimes, you need to completely change the math/layout of a widget to get real themability. Unfortunately, we don't have that. -- dobey _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
