On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 06:18:28AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 04:40:30AM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult > wrote: > > I'm currently packaging recent geeqie for Ubuntu Trustry > > (which I'm still running on my notebook), and that leads me > > to an interesting question: > > > > How to properly package applications that can be built for > > gtk2 vs. gtk3 ? > > I'd say GTK3 doesn't "have regressions", but "it's one big regression". > Just to name a few: CSD, font selection dialog, file open/save dialog, etc. > > However, I see most project which didn't abandon the GTK ship altogether > (Chromium, LXDE, etc) downgrading to GTK3 these days: Firefox (was in
Typo? Or is there a GTK4 they are downgrading from? Or have I completely misunderstood? (I'm not being sarcastic; misunderstanding happens often enough.) > unstable, reverted for now), MATE (already), Xfce (not yet done upstream), > etc. Thus, it looks like we'll suffer it in the long run. > > > Should we have two separate packages (eg. geeqie-gtk2 vs. > > geeqie-gtk3) ? > > I'd bother only if you care about Gnome3. And as we're on dng rather than > debian-devel, I guess you don't. > > > And how to handle other optional features (eg. lirc support) ? > > Typically the answer is "include everything unless it'd pull _really_ fat > dependencies, and even then the optional stuff should still be packaged", > but it depends on whom you package it for. Best to use your best judgement. > > > Meow! > -- > An imaginary friend squared is a real enemy. > _______________________________________________ > Dng mailing list > Dng@lists.dyne.org > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
