Re: [Gimp-developer] glib/gtk+ 2.0 port

[pcg]

On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 03:43:51PM -0500, Kelly Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you have to use a "development" version at least pick a fixed point
> in development and use that.  Otherwise you're coding to not one, but
> two moving targets: your own code PLUS the moving code in the library
> you depend on.  Or, in this case, five.  
> 
> If your goal is to make development as chaotic and difficult as
> possible, you are on the right track.

I am sorry, but what you describe is reality for most plug-in authors. Did
plug-in developers develop for gtk-1.0 and gimp-1.0 a year ago?

It's more of a social problem: do we *trust* the gtk development model to
be stable most of the time? I did trust the gimp developers that they want
working code as well, and it worked fine. If gtk+ is as chaotic as you
think it is, it is evry bad and gimp shouldn't use the HEAD revision.

-- 
      -----==-                                             |
      ----==-- _                                           |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann      +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       [EMAIL PROTECTED]      |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\       XX11-RIPE         --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                       |
                                                         |
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer