On 2011-03-08 at 22:16, Paul Davis wrote: > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 9:56 PM, Andrew Cowie > <and...@operationaldynamics.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-03-08 at 12:06 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote: > >> I would very much like some reasoning to point people at when I tell > >> them to use GtkApplication. I will not just hand-wave and say that > >> people say it's good. > > > > GtkApplication is the GNOME 3.0 replacement for LibUnique, right? If so, > > then fine; the developer can choose whether the single instance pattern > > is appropriate for their application as before. > > this is part of the problem here. GtkApplication was originally > floated as something a bit different than "just" what libunique did. > it increasingly feels as if it has morphed into nothing but a > repalcement for it. this may or may not be true, but that's certainly > the impression that discussions about it are creating.
no, GtkApplication isn't being "morphed" into libunique replacement - and I can say so as the maintainer of libunique. it just so happens that, for the desktop that is currently being targeted on the X11/Linux platform (i.e. GNOME 3), the default approach for applications is strongly adviced to be the single-instance one[0]. then there are the actions, for remote control; the "application as a service" implementation; the startup notification control; the window ↔ application relationship; the main loop control tied to the application's lifetime; etc. as usual, if developers for other platforms want to be represented, they have to show up. ciao, Emmanuele. [0] *strongly adviced* doesn't mean "you can't do anything else, or else you'll receive a visit from a guy named Ramone and a 2-by-4"; it means that you should probably follow the advice to get the best experience possible on that particular platform. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list