On Tue, 2006-09-19 at 18:50 +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote: > Please, don't inflate GNOME dependences on non-technical merit. If > some program can be compiled with library version X, it's NOT OK to > depend on library version X+1 or X+2. > G-P-M is good example: its real dependency is HAL 0.5.6. Requiring > higher version is unfair to users.
Umm no. I get frequent bug reports for gnome-power-manager that are really bugs in HAL that were fixed *months* ago. I would go as far to say that my bugs/week value would halve if there was a hard dep on 0.5.8. You really want to see the hal ChangeLog and look for "power" and "battery" - there are lots of changes in the last year or so. If you want gnome-power-manager to use CPU scaling support, with all the enhancements and bugfixes, then the "real dependency" is 0.5.8. For HEAD, I've just upped the gtk+ requirement to 2.10 and dropped eggtrayicon support. Why? Because of the bugs in eggtrayicon and the better solution of GtkStatusIcon. That's pretty aggressive (you need a development distro, jhbuild or garnome to build the HEAD at the moment) but relying on multiple layers of #ifdefs is really bad for testing. On that matter, there's about 50 lines of obsolete code in various classes of g-p-m that can be removed if the HAL dep is increased. My opinion is to aim to use 0.5.8.[x] for 2-17 as by the release date of GNOME 2.18, most of the distros will be releasing > 0.5.6 version of HAL. It's not fair to ask of maintainers "add GtkStatusIcon enhancements but also keep the ~15 #ifdefs around for users of eggtrayicon" even though stable distros are not going to release gtk+ 2.10 package updates. Also, Elijah mentioned about the build issues... Anyone got any links to specific problems?. Thanks. Richard. p.s. Sorry if that read like a rant, it has been a _long_ day! :-) _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list