On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Simon McVittie <simon.mcvit...@collabora.co.uk> wrote: > On Fri, 2016-10-07 at 11:14 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Bastien Nocera <had...@hadess.net> >> wrote: >> > Which would mean nothing called "gtk+" in the modulesets? Why not >> > keep >> > either gtk 3.x or gtk 4.x with that name? >> > >> > I'd expect the "gtk+" module to build GTK+ 4.x ("the latest"). >> >> I have no strong opinion on this. Not having gtk+ in the moduleset >> doesn't seem like a big deal to me. The + in the name is a bit >> awkward, tbh. > > Losing the gtk+ module would mean third-party modulesets are forced to > make a decision on whether they want gtk3 or gtk4, which seems like it > might be desirable?
I ended up naming the modules gtk+-3 and gtk+, and I switched all existing dependencies in the moduleset to gtk+-3 for now. 3rd party modules will still have to make a decision. We can change the name to gtk+-4 if that is preferred. _______________________________________________ release-team@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team Release-team lurker? Do NOT participate in discussions.