On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Kevin Gordon <kgordon...@gmail.com> wrote: > While I understand that a move to GTK3 would eventually mean less bloat, i > did not realize, from what I now infer here, that also keeping the GTK2 > functionality concurrent on the machine would still have savings. Again, > good news.
You are right on that point - having concurrent GTK3 + GTK2 support in Sugar will be an overhead, particularly while some running parts of Sugar are GTK2 and others are GTK3. It will mean that both library versions are installed and loaded into memory. But this will be temporary, and is not a huge overhead. Even so, there are 2 justifications for this temporary overhead: 1. It's the path to a smaller/faster/better system, so we should take it (and work to keep the concurrency period short) 2. And more importantly... We don't have a choice! Sugar is already significantly broken. If you go beyond F14 you have no Read and no Browse. We have no upstream support for key parts of our underlying system. This situation will get worse and worse, more and more things will break, and the transition will become more and more painful the longer we wait. Daniel _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
