Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Oct 10, 2011, at 8:11 AM, John Ralls wrote: I've made a lot of progress on this in the last few weeks. The wiki pages are transferred, the gtk-osx, gtk-mac-integration, gtk-mac-bundler projects are in git.gnome and ftp.gnome, and Kris has gotten most of the patches reviewed and I've pushed them. Now to the web page. I've written a replacement for www.gtk.org/downloads/macos.php with a lot of editorial help from Martyn, and it's now ready for you all to review. Martyn has put up a preview at http://curlybeast.net:8080/download/macos.php Please have a look and comment either here or directly to me. I'd like to merge this into gtk-web master by Thursday. Thanks for the work! I was just catching up, and it looks good. I'll be poking at it soon to see if I can get back up to speed with native OSX changes. Before things had stalled, I was about halfway done with fixing tablet support. Hopefully we can get that set soon. ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:11 PM, John Ralls jra...@ceridwen.us wrote: Please have a look and comment either here or directly to me. I'd like to merge this into gtk-web master by Thursday. looks good to me. we should also get ardour onto the ported-app list somehow. ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Oct 11, 2011, at 3:18 PM, Paul Davis wrote: On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:11 PM, John Ralls jra...@ceridwen.us wrote: Please have a look and comment either here or directly to me. I'd like to merge this into gtk-web master by Thursday. looks good to me. we should also get ardour onto the ported-app list somehow. It's a wiki. Just do it. ;-) Regards, John Ralls ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
I've made a lot of progress on this in the last few weeks. The wiki pages are transferred, the gtk-osx, gtk-mac-integration, gtk-mac-bundler projects are in git.gnome and ftp.gnome, and Kris has gotten most of the patches reviewed and I've pushed them. Now to the web page. I've written a replacement for www.gtk.org/downloads/macos.php with a lot of editorial help from Martyn, and it's now ready for you all to review. Martyn has put up a preview at http://curlybeast.net:8080/download/macos.php Please have a look and comment either here or directly to me. I'd like to merge this into gtk-web master by Thursday. Regards, John Ralls ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
Great stuff! Thanks a lot for the effort John, good job! :-) 2011/10/10 John Ralls jra...@ceridwen.us I've made a lot of progress on this in the last few weeks. The wiki pages are transferred, the gtk-osx, gtk-mac-integration, gtk-mac-bundler projects are in git.gnome and ftp.gnome, and Kris has gotten most of the patches reviewed and I've pushed them. Now to the web page. I've written a replacement for www.gtk.org/downloads/macos.php with a lot of editorial help from Martyn, and it's now ready for you all to review. Martyn has put up a preview at http://curlybeast.net:8080/download/macos.php Please have a look and comment either here or directly to me. I'd like to merge this into gtk-web master by Thursday. Regards, John Ralls ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list -- Cheers, Alberto Ruiz ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Sep 12, 2011, at 9:15 PM, John Ralls wrote: I rebased a local branch off quartz-integration against master and carefully went through all of the changes. There were indeed a couple that didn't have bugs, so I created the bugs and attached the relevant patches. There were some others that were quite old, so I updated the patches on the bugs. That's great! Much appreciated. Now that I seem to have GtkTreeModelFilter under control, I will move back again to Quartz review. thanks, -kris. ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Sep 7, 2011, at 7:26 AM, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
Now, on technical matters:
I looked quickly at git diff origin/master..origin/quartz-integration
and the diff is very simple:
* A bunch of changes to gdk-quartz and gtk*-quartz.c - I imagine that
these can be merged just as they are, since they don't touch the
platform-independent code at all. I'm sure some of these bits could be
reviewed / prettified by someone who knows a lot of OSX idioms, but it's
better to have them in *now* and polish them later.
* This bit:
--- a/gdk/x11/gdkdevicemanager-xi2.c
+++ b/gdk/x11/gdkdevicemanager-xi2.c
@@ -417,10 +417,6 @@ gdk_x11_device_manager_xi2_constructed (GObject *object)
for (i = 0; i ndevices; i++)
{
dev = info[i];
-
- if (!dev-enabled)
- continue;
-
add_device (device_manager, dev, FALSE);
No idea what that's about.
Not mine, likely due to my having turned off the nightly merges/builds/pushes
until this matter gets sorted.
* Some Makefile.am changes; these could use a quick sanity check.
* Some additions to gtkprivate.h, analogous to what it has for win32 right
now.
* A bunch of #ifndef GDK_WINDOWING_QUARTZ in gtkselection.c, so that
those functions can be implemented in gtkselection-quartz.c instead.
This can probably be made prettier by moving the original functions to a
gtkselection-x11.c or something like that.
Or I could duplicate the whole file, as was done with gtkdnd-quartz.c and
gtkclipboard-quartz.c. I prefer not to do that because any maintenance on the
primary file will cause problems unless it's quickly noticed and the
quartz-specific file is also updated.
There's a larger problem with this, though, worthy of its own thread: Compile
time OS/GDK_WINDOWING checks break the multiple-backend architecture of Gtk3.
Quartz is the worst offender, but there are ifdef OS_WIN32 blocks floating
around too.
* An unused variable in gtkthemingengine.c; should be removed.
* Inconsequential whitespace changes in some .po files; should be
removed.
More out-of-sync-with-master differences.
* A tests/testundecorated.c - no idea.
Related to a crash in Lion with undecorated windows. See bug 655079. There's no
patch to add this to master; I'm not sure whether or not it should be. The fix
has already been committed to master and backported to 2.24, and the bug closed.
In all, it sounds like you could merge all the changes to *quartz*.[ch]
files as they are, and just give a quick look to the rest of the
changes.
As to what is in Bugzilla, is there a quick way to find all the Quartz
bugs to speed up their review? (Or are those patches already in the
quartz-integration branch? I didn't look at individual commits to see
if they had bug numbers.)
I rebased a local branch off quartz-integration against master and carefully
went through all of the changes. There were indeed a couple that didn't have
bugs, so I created the bugs and attached the relevant patches. There were some
others that were quite old, so I updated the patches on the bugs. The bugs in
question are:
514843: gtkfilechooser should be more robust
571582: GtkSelection implementation for quartz.
628936: Minimal change to pass introspection.
657770: Write releaseed memory in gtkdnd-quartz.c
607115: _gtk_key_hash_lookup fails to handle modifiers
658722: Drag and Drop sometimes stops working
658767: Drag and Drop NSEvent is Racy
658772: Directory paths for resource directories are hard coded.
Regards,
John Ralls
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
John Ralls wrote: Not moduleset, modulesets. Three sets of 9 modulesets. Also 36 patches, some of which are obsolete and could be deleted (and a bunch more that could become obsolete if they were approved for committing to Gtk), a customized jhbuildrc and several examples for further customization. Yes, it could be integrated into the jhbuild repo, but it would take some discussion with the jhbuild maintainers to work out how to lay it out. I don't think JHBuild should be a repository for modulesets, those are better maintained next to their respective projects (be it gtk-osx, or spice, or sugar, etc.). JHBuild has support for remote modulesets, and remote patches, so I don't think this is a problem. Fred ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On 8 September 2011 23:42, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote: On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 10:38:02AM -0700, John Ralls wrote: And the fact that I'm here shows that I agree. Shawn was here (until Olaf kicked him off this morning) for the same reason. I'm quite Shawn kicked himself off. If you are so concerned about politeness and non-controversy of this list then kick Emmanuele too. Or are only members of Gnome foundation board allowed to be rude on this list? :p Regards Michal ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Fri, 9 Sep 2011, Michal Suchanek wrote: [something irritable] My reaction to the recent exchanges concerning GTK on both OS X and MS Windows is quite different. Despite some snappishness the conversation seems very encouraging for the future of GTK as a cross-platform toolkit. Thanks, guys, and keep up the cooperation! Allin Cottrell ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On 9 September 2011 14:58, Allin Cottrell cottr...@wfu.edu wrote: On Fri, 9 Sep 2011, Michal Suchanek wrote: [something irritable] My reaction to the recent exchanges concerning GTK on both OS X and MS Windows is quite different. Despite some snappishness the conversation seems very encouraging for the future of GTK as a cross-platform toolkit. Thanks, guys, and keep up the cooperation! At least until all are banned from the list :p Thanks Michal ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 05:28:21PM -0700, John Ralls wrote: The rest of Gtk-OSX isn't Gtk. It's a build system using jhbuild with its own modulesets, a python script for making application bundles, and a few other bits and pieces, including gtk-quartz-engine, a Cocoa HIT theme engine which I haven't touched since Richard Hult left it to me except to ensure that the github and git.gnome.org repos are the same. I don't even know if it works with Gtk3. The moduleset could just be in jhbuild? What's the cost of keeping those bits on Sourceforge vs. Gnome.org? ISTM it will cost me a lot of time and effort to move them into gnome.org with no real benefit to anyone except Emmanuele who can't seem to get an SF account. (Emmanuele, if you really want to sort that out, email me directly and I'll see what I can do to help.) I have a sourceforge account and I don't see any benefit of using / monitoring anything other than *.gnome.org. Though of course, I am not a developer nor OS-X user, so it won't matter for you :P It will take some time to move things over, but at least it shows interest into OS-X. And as was said, gnome developers use gnome infrastructure. -- Regards, Olav ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 12:34:59PM -0400, Shawn Bakhtiar wrote: Emmanuel I understand you care about Jeff, and though I believe the initial message could be worded differently, I have to say: * pot calling the kettle black regarding tone on the mailing list * you're now banned from gtk-devel-list -- Regards, Olav ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Sep 8, 2011, at 4:55 AM, Olav Vitters wrote: On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 05:28:21PM -0700, John Ralls wrote: The rest of Gtk-OSX isn't Gtk. It's a build system using jhbuild with its own modulesets, The moduleset could just be in jhbuild? Not moduleset, modulesets. Three sets of 9 modulesets. Also 36 patches, some of which are obsolete and could be deleted (and a bunch more that could become obsolete if they were approved for committing to Gtk), a customized jhbuildrc and several examples for further customization. Yes, it could be integrated into the jhbuild repo, but it would take some discussion with the jhbuild maintainers to work out how to lay it out. Regards, John Ralls ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Sep 7, 2011, at 2:10 AM, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote: Le mardi 06 septembre 2011 à 16:34 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : I'm not going to respond to most of that. I think you shouldn't take Emmanuele's tone so bad. ;-) He's always very direct, but his point is right, and his suggestions are actually the acknowledgment that your work is worth being part of core GTK - they are meant to help you. I'm going to try telling things in a slightly nicer fashion... Suffice it to say that building gtk-osx is largely automated, and there are well-tested instructions at http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gtk-osx/wiki/Build That's not the question. This page should be on live.gnome.org, because that's where we assume docs are, and people with an account there can give a hand. Well, you know what they say about assume, but OK. That's probably the easiest task on the list, though I think GnomeLive and Trac Wiki use some different notation so there would be some work reformatting unless someone knows of a ready-made translation program somewhere. I didn't get commit privs at Gnome.org until just under a year ago, 18 months after I took over from Richard. I still don't have privs on any of the other facilities except Bugzilla, and there only because I'm a Gnucash Dev. (That turns out to be sufficient for almost everything.) Maybe it took some time, but in my experience getting privileges is very fast. Anyway, now you have everything you need to work on gnome.org, don't you? No. I have commit privs on git.gnome.org, and dev privs on bugzilla (not through Gtk+, though). I would need to make binaries available on ftp.gnome.org and to have a support mailing list (which I haven't requested, so that's not anyone's fault. I did request privs for ftp.gnome.org at the same time I requested git commit privs, but that wasn't granted.) Gtk-OSX needs its own mailing list because it provides jhbuild modules for over 100 separate projects, not all of which are even Gnome. It's not feasible for me to monitor all of them for support, nor is it reasonable for users of my build scripts to have to figure out which one to use for any particular problem. So maybe you need a separate mailing list for helping building these programs, but it could live on gnome.org. For GTK+ development itself , the present list is the natural place, like Emmanuele said. And the fact that I'm here shows that I agree. Shawn was here (until Olaf kicked him off this morning) for the same reason. I'm quite aggressive about pushing problems about whatever module to the appropriate bug tracker or mailing list. (In most cases, that's gtk-app-devel rather than gtk-devel for gtk.) It's not a fork of Gtk+ (yet, though on days like this one I get really tempted). I actually revived the gtk-osx project on SF; the previous version was an actual fork of Gtk1. So let's improve things a step more, and completely merge the project. Sounds like the natural end of the story. :-) Merge which project with what? The actual build project could be merged with jhbuild, but it's not a simple dropin and would need to be discussed. Where should that discussion take place? Here? I could create projects for ige-mac-bundler and ige-mac-integration (though they should probably be renamed to gtk-mac-foo) on git.gnome.org, but unless I can upload the tarballs it doesn't do me much good. gtk-quartz-engine is already on git.gnome. On the other hand, bundling is part of building, so bundler could be folded into jhbuild. Ige-mac-integration is an add-on to Gtk that (rather tortuously) puts the menus on the mac menu bar and provides access to the Dock menu for Gtk applications. I think it could be integrated into Gtk+ (I haven't tried) but since some app devs like to keep the menus on the windows, it should probably be a runtime option. Two other pieces, gtk-osx-docbook and gnome-doc-utils-fake, could be combined under a mac support directory of jhbuild. They don't need much maintenance (I haven't needed to touch either of them since I got them from Richard), but their tarballs need to be hosted somewhere. Bugs are another issue. If the build portion gets merged with jhbuild, then I'd say there should be an osx component there to receive gtk-osx bugs. (There haven't been many.) The webpage could be moved into gtk.org, though I don't think it should go under downloads as that conveys rather the wrong impression. Some assembly (no, not that kind ;-) ) definitely required. It would take a bit of cleanup to make it look like the rest of the Gtk website; more important, it would need to be converted to php, and I have zero knowledge about how to do that. As I explained earlier, the changes *are* patches, they *are* attached to bugs in Bugzilla, and Kris Reitveld *has* promised to review them. When he has had time to do so and they have been polished to his high standards, they will be committed into mainline. If you need
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 10:38:02AM -0700, John Ralls wrote: And the fact that I'm here shows that I agree. Shawn was here (until Olaf kicked him off this morning) for the same reason. I'm quite Shawn kicked himself off. -- Regards, Olav ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
hi Paul; On 2011-09-06 at 18:18, Paul Davis wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote: otherwise you're just forking gtk, and using the resources of the gtk project to give an aura of officiality to what is essentially your own personal project. I'd politely request that you stop using this tone in connection with this issue. I am a gtk contributor and I want to start helping with the OSX backend because I got a new MBP and I'm working on gtk and clutter and I want them both to work on my brand new machine. the first thing I noticed when I wanted to build my applications was that I had to go on a website that has nothing to do with gtk.org, download a jhbuild moduleset from a location that is not on gnome.org, follow a mailing list that is not on gnome.org and file bugs on a bug tracking system that is not on gnome.org now, tell me: what does it look like to you? to me, and not just to me, it looks like a fork. John says it isn't, and I believe him; so I want to fix the situation where it looks like one. I read bugzilla emails for gtk (I know: shocker) and people file bugs against the moduleset and the build on bugzilla.gnome.org; John has to direct them to a separate bugzilla and to a separate mailing list. I want to fix this. Windows and Linux build issues and support are handled on gnome.org: the Quartz backend of gtk is not in any regard special and it should not need separate resources. There has always been a level of antagonism between developers working on GTK for OS X and the core development team. It rises and falls, and at present, things are generally in remarkably good shape, where most of what is required to get a fully functional GTK for OS X is right there in the tarball releases. and if you try to actually contribute, that's where the bubble bursts. But when you start ripping into one of the only people willing to actually step up and take any responsibility for the issues faced by those of us that actually want to use GTK+ as a cross-platform development toolkit where the platforms include OS X, its remarkably scary. Other people have walked away from the effort because of the perception of the core GTK guys just don't give a shit, and it doesn't help in any way that you take such an argumentative tone with john. that's the problem: I *am* a core gtk guy, and I *give* a shit. Mitch is a core gtk guy and he gives a shit. Kris is a core gtk guy and he gives a shit. you already have three. aside from the backend development and the toolkit development, what I give a shit about is also the marketing of said toolkit; from a marketing perspective, this whole divide is terrible and it has to be rectified. we're already getting pummeled by people thinking that other toolkits with better marketing are superior — let's not give them other ammunition. I also give a shit about the use vs. them attitude: if the gtk-osx project is handled like its own thing, in its own ghetto, then it won't make it any easier to get traction inside the team. attending IRC team meetings, discussing new features directly during the design phase, coming to hackfests and to GUADEC: that's what maintainers do. So please could you tone it down a bit, and rather than excoriate John for whatever you perceive his mistakes or whatever to be, focus on helpful suggestions. I apologize for the tone: I am *very* frustrated by this situation. now, I suggested how to improve the situation in the email as well. I talk as both a member of the gtk team and as a Director of the Gnome Foundation's Board: if services aren't moved as fast as they should, I can help facilitate that. ciao, Emmanuele. -- 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
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
Le mardi 06 septembre 2011 à 16:34 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : I'm not going to respond to most of that. I think you shouldn't take Emmanuele's tone so bad. ;-) He's always very direct, but his point is right, and his suggestions are actually the acknowledgment that your work is worth being part of core GTK - they are meant to help you. I'm going to try telling things in a slightly nicer fashion... Suffice it to say that building gtk-osx is largely automated, and there are well-tested instructions at http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gtk-osx/wiki/Build That's not the question. This page should be on live.gnome.org, because that's where we assume docs are, and people with an account there can give a hand. I didn't get commit privs at Gnome.org until just under a year ago, 18 months after I took over from Richard. I still don't have privs on any of the other facilities except Bugzilla, and there only because I'm a Gnucash Dev. (That turns out to be sufficient for almost everything.) Maybe it took some time, but in my experience getting privileges is very fast. Anyway, now you have everything you need to work on gnome.org, don't you? Gtk-OSX needs its own mailing list because it provides jhbuild modules for over 100 separate projects, not all of which are even Gnome. It's not feasible for me to monitor all of them for support, nor is it reasonable for users of my build scripts to have to figure out which one to use for any particular problem. So maybe you need a separate mailing list for helping building these programs, but it could live on gnome.org. For GTK+ development itself , the present list is the natural place, like Emmanuele said. It's not a fork of Gtk+ (yet, though on days like this one I get really tempted). I actually revived the gtk-osx project on SF; the previous version was an actual fork of Gtk1. So let's improve things a step more, and completely merge the project. Sounds like the natural end of the story. :-) As I explained earlier, the changes *are* patches, they *are* attached to bugs in Bugzilla, and Kris Reitveld *has* promised to review them. When he has had time to do so and they have been polished to his high standards, they will be committed into mainline. If you need Kris to review your patches before committing them to mainline, then the usual way is to have a branch in the GTK git repository, and rebase it into master when it's accepted. That's much easier for everybody, much better than putting them on a different repo. In the meantime they're quite useful for a number of projects who want a better Mac experience for their users than the Gtk core devs seem motivated to provide. *This* is a different issue. If reviewers cannot keep up with your patches, and you need to release tarballs that include code not in mainline, that means gtk-osx isn't yet fully merged into GTK. But, disregarding the fact that it would probably be good that everything goes to mainline in time, putting your gtk-osx special branch on in the GTK repository instead of SF would be a good thing. I hope that was helpful... ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Milan Bouchet-Valat nalimi...@club.fr wrote: Le mardi 06 septembre 2011 à 16:34 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : It's not a fork of Gtk+ (yet, though on days like this one I get really tempted). I actually revived the gtk-osx project on SF; the previous version was an actual fork of Gtk1. So let's improve things a step more, and completely merge the project. Sounds like the natural end of the story. :-) As I explained earlier, the changes *are* patches, they *are* attached to bugs in Bugzilla, and Kris Reitveld *has* promised to review them. When he has had time to do so and they have been polished to his high standards, they will be committed into mainline. If you need Kris to review your patches before committing them to mainline, then the usual way is to have a branch in the GTK git repository, and rebase it into master when it's accepted. That's much easier for everybody, much better than putting them on a different repo. To clarify this, the branch is already in the GTK+ git repo and not on SF. As John has mentioned, all patches are attached to bugs in Bugzilla, which I prefer above digging through a branch to find the changes. regards, -kris. ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 08:25 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
Windows and Linux build issues and support are handled on gnome.org: the
Quartz backend of gtk is not in any regard special and it should not
need separate resources.
One thing we have been bad at is learning to accept that sometimes, our
Gnome ecosystem breeds little niches of their own, and then some of them
turn into rightful ecosystems that *don't really need* much
communication with the mainline - they can exist on their own, with
occasional re-syncs, and with occasional pain.
I imagine that the Quartz backend is such a case: it probably started as
a let's port this and see where it takes us exercise, and then people
started writing jhbuild modulesets for apps, integration patches, etc.
It started growing and generating its own gravity and it didn't really
need to share much with Gnome or GTK+ proper - it would have been nice
to keep everything integrated from the start, in both code and
infrastructure, but it would probably have implied a lot of extra work
for both parties.
*Now* it seems to be the time where the cost of keeping things separate
is greater than just re-syncing periodically - so let that be; do the
integration and forget about the temporary split. You can think of
this work of merging as the necessary work to meld two ecosystems
together - you can't put a desert next to a jungle without a savannah in
the middle. Okay, bad analogy, but I'm only on my first coffee today.
Now, on technical matters:
I looked quickly at git diff origin/master..origin/quartz-integration
and the diff is very simple:
* A bunch of changes to gdk-quartz and gtk*-quartz.c - I imagine that
these can be merged just as they are, since they don't touch the
platform-independent code at all. I'm sure some of these bits could be
reviewed / prettified by someone who knows a lot of OSX idioms, but it's
better to have them in *now* and polish them later.
* This bit:
--- a/gdk/x11/gdkdevicemanager-xi2.c
+++ b/gdk/x11/gdkdevicemanager-xi2.c
@@ -417,10 +417,6 @@ gdk_x11_device_manager_xi2_constructed (GObject *object)
for (i = 0; i ndevices; i++)
{
dev = info[i];
-
- if (!dev-enabled)
- continue;
-
add_device (device_manager, dev, FALSE);
No idea what that's about.
* Some Makefile.am changes; these could use a quick sanity check.
* Some additions to gtkprivate.h, analogous to what it has for win32 right now.
* A bunch of #ifndef GDK_WINDOWING_QUARTZ in gtkselection.c, so that
those functions can be implemented in gtkselection-quartz.c instead.
This can probably be made prettier by moving the original functions to a
gtkselection-x11.c or something like that.
* An unused variable in gtkthemingengine.c; should be removed.
* Inconsequential whitespace changes in some .po files; should be
removed.
* A tests/testundecorated.c - no idea.
In all, it sounds like you could merge all the changes to *quartz*.[ch]
files as they are, and just give a quick look to the rest of the
changes.
As to what is in Bugzilla, is there a quick way to find all the Quartz
bugs to speed up their review? (Or are those patches already in the
quartz-integration branch? I didn't look at individual commits to see
if they had bug numbers.)
Federico
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On 7 September 2011 15:26, Federico Mena Quintero feder...@gnome.org wrote: As to what is in Bugzilla, is there a quick way to find all the Quartz bugs to speed up their review? (Or are those patches already in the quartz-integration branch? I didn't look at individual commits to see if they had bug numbers.) All quartz bugs: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced;bug_status=UNCONFIRMED;bug_status=NEW;bug_status=ASSIGNED;bug_status=REOPENED;bug_status=NEEDINFO;component=quartz;product=gtk%2B with patches: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced;field0-0-0=attachments.ispatch;bug_status=UNCONFIRMED;bug_status=NEW;bug_status=ASSIGNED;bug_status=REOPENED;bug_status=NEEDINFO;type0-0-0=equals;value0-0-0=1;component=quartz;product=gtk%2B Regards, -- Javier Jardón Cabezas ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
Hey :),
On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 09:26 -0500, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
* This bit:
--- a/gdk/x11/gdkdevicemanager-xi2.c
+++ b/gdk/x11/gdkdevicemanager-xi2.c
@@ -417,10 +417,6 @@ gdk_x11_device_manager_xi2_constructed (GObject *object)
for (i = 0; i ndevices; i++)
{
dev = info[i];
-
- if (!dev-enabled)
- continue;
-
add_device (device_manager, dev, FALSE);
No idea what that's about.
That's the inverse of a recent commit of mine to master, not sure how it
slipped in the diff, maybe the branch is being compared to a more recent
master?
Cheers,
Carlos
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
2011/9/7 Javier Jardón jjar...@gnome.org: On 7 September 2011 15:26, Federico Mena Quintero feder...@gnome.org wrote: As to what is in Bugzilla, is there a quick way to find all the Quartz bugs to speed up their review? (Or are those patches already in the quartz-integration branch? I didn't look at individual commits to see if they had bug numbers.) I just added a table with links to gtk/glib/pango MacOS bugs in the wiki page [1] If you think any other query would be useful let me know. Regards [1] https://live.gnome.org/GTK%2B/OSX -- Javier Jardón Cabezas ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On 2011-09-07, Carlos Garnacho wrote: That's the inverse of a recent commit of mine to master, not sure how it slipped in the diff, maybe the branch is being compared to a more recent master? Perhaps `git diff origin/master...origin/quartz-integration' would work better? P.S. As someone who's planning on porting a gtk+ application to OSX, thanks to everyone for working on some of these integration issues :) pgp71qDD6VSch.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
RE: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
EmmanuelYour an ass (as in donkey) But don't be offended by my tone, I only say this because I care about what happens the the OS X version of GTK. John has been working his tail off, all the while responding to dump developers like me, while I can't get a tweet out of an elites like you. I'm sick of your crap man! I was one of the people on this list who pushed to get John what little rights he does have, and like one post said, if you ACTUALLY cared, you would be making good positive suggestions, not ripping into the ONE person who actually has taken a vested interest in fulfilling, what the website touts as already there. When I first started down this path, the website claimed OS X, but when I got working everything was in taters, and if it had not been for John's tireless efforts, your claim on the website that the product works on OS X would be an outright lie! When I finally downloaded the source, it was full of NEEDS TO BE IMPLEMENTED all over it, and if I had a smidgen of skill I would be helping John. So take a cold shower, and if you have any decency you would issue John a formal apology on this list. But I doubt you will. Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 08:25:24 +0100 From: eba...@gmail.com To: p...@linuxaudiosystems.com Subject: Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity CC: gtk-devel-list@gnome.org hi Paul; On 2011-09-06 at 18:18, Paul Davis wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote: otherwise you're just forking gtk, and using the resources of the gtk project to give an aura of officiality to what is essentially your own personal project. I'd politely request that you stop using this tone in connection with this issue. I am a gtk contributor and I want to start helping with the OSX backend because I got a new MBP and I'm working on gtk and clutter and I want them both to work on my brand new machine. the first thing I noticed when I wanted to build my applications was that I had to go on a website that has nothing to do with gtk.org, download a jhbuild moduleset from a location that is not on gnome.org, follow a mailing list that is not on gnome.org and file bugs on a bug tracking system that is not on gnome.org now, tell me: what does it look like to you? to me, and not just to me, it looks like a fork. John says it isn't, and I believe him; so I want to fix the situation where it looks like one. I read bugzilla emails for gtk (I know: shocker) and people file bugs against the moduleset and the build on bugzilla.gnome.org; John has to direct them to a separate bugzilla and to a separate mailing list. I want to fix this. Windows and Linux build issues and support are handled on gnome.org: the Quartz backend of gtk is not in any regard special and it should not need separate resources. There has always been a level of antagonism between developers working on GTK for OS X and the core development team. It rises and falls, and at present, things are generally in remarkably good shape, where most of what is required to get a fully functional GTK for OS X is right there in the tarball releases. and if you try to actually contribute, that's where the bubble bursts. But when you start ripping into one of the only people willing to actually step up and take any responsibility for the issues faced by those of us that actually want to use GTK+ as a cross-platform development toolkit where the platforms include OS X, its remarkably scary. Other people have walked away from the effort because of the perception of the core GTK guys just don't give a shit, and it doesn't help in any way that you take such an argumentative tone with john. that's the problem: I *am* a core gtk guy, and I *give* a shit. Mitch is a core gtk guy and he gives a shit. Kris is a core gtk guy and he gives a shit. you already have three. aside from the backend development and the toolkit development, what I give a shit about is also the marketing of said toolkit; from a marketing perspective, this whole divide is terrible and it has to be rectified. we're already getting pummeled by people thinking that other toolkits with better marketing are superior — let's not give them other ammunition. I also give a shit about the use vs. them attitude: if the gtk-osx project is handled like its own thing, in its own ghetto, then it won't make it any easier to get traction inside the team. attending IRC team meetings, discussing new features directly during the design phase, coming to hackfests and to GUADEC: that's what maintainers do. So please could you tone it down a bit, and rather than excoriate John for whatever you perceive his mistakes or whatever to be, focus on helpful suggestions. I apologize for the tone: I am *very* frustrated by this situation. now, I suggested how to improve the situation in the email as well. I talk as both a member of the gtk
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On 9/7/2011 6:34 PM, Shawn Bakhtiar wrote: EmmanuelYour an ass (as in donkey) Everyone just HAS to vent their spleen, don't they? I don't know John so maybe I am off base here but I'm fairly certain he is capable of defending himself quite well without that sort of useless comment. Your little diatribe added absolutely nothing of value to the discussion. In case any others are tempted to follow your poor example, please don't. Also, please learn some basic email etiquette and don't quote the entire message. That also adds no value and wastes bandwidth and storage space. ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Sep 7, 2011, at 7:26 AM, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 08:25 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: Windows and Linux build issues and support are handled on gnome.org: the Quartz backend of gtk is not in any regard special and it should not need separate resources. One thing we have been bad at is learning to accept that sometimes, our Gnome ecosystem breeds little niches of their own, and then some of them turn into rightful ecosystems that *don't really need* much communication with the mainline - they can exist on their own, with occasional re-syncs, and with occasional pain. I imagine that the Quartz backend is such a case: it probably started as a let's port this and see where it takes us exercise, and then people started writing jhbuild modulesets for apps, integration patches, etc. It started growing and generating its own gravity and it didn't really need to share much with Gnome or GTK+ proper - it would have been nice to keep everything integrated from the start, in both code and infrastructure, but it would probably have implied a lot of extra work for both parties. *Now* it seems to be the time where the cost of keeping things separate is greater than just re-syncing periodically - so let that be; do the integration and forget about the temporary split. You can think of this work of merging as the necessary work to meld two ecosystems together - you can't put a desert next to a jungle without a savannah in the middle. Okay, bad analogy, but I'm only on my first coffee today. It's important not to confuse Gtk-OSX with Gtk's quartz backend. The latter is completely part of Gtk, and I use Gtk's facilities exclusively for working on it... except for ige-mac-integration, a library which allows Gtk applications to use the Mac menu bar and Dock menus, and is still a separate project because I haven't mad time to integrate it. OTOH, I wrote the gtkselection implementation 2 years ago and the patch [1] is still in the review hopper, so I'm not the only one short on time. The rest of Gtk-OSX isn't Gtk. It's a build system using jhbuild with its own modulesets, a python script for making application bundles, and a few other bits and pieces, including gtk-quartz-engine, a Cocoa HIT theme engine which I haven't touched since Richard Hult left it to me except to ensure that the github and git.gnome.org repos are the same. I don't even know if it works with Gtk3. What's the cost of keeping those bits on Sourceforge vs. Gnome.org? ISTM it will cost me a lot of time and effort to move them into gnome.org with no real benefit to anyone except Emmanuele who can't seem to get an SF account. (Emmanuele, if you really want to sort that out, email me directly and I'll see what I can do to help.) Regards, John Ralls [1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=571582 ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote: okay, I've tried to get ahold of the gtk-osx project for a while, now, but since sf.net is just a joke and decided to reject my @gmail.com emails, let's try here. can we *please* stop this madness: 17:05 CIA-8 jralls quartz-integration * r7e37d94f2178 gtk+/ (10 files in 4 dirs): Merge branch 'master' into quartz-integration 17:05 CIA-8 jralls quartz-integration * rf75a882670a8 gtk+/ (9 files in 4 dirs): Merge branch 'master' into quartz-integration 17:05 CIA-8 jralls quartz-integration * r8c288f0f890e gtk+/ (24 files in 7 dirs): Merge branch 'master' into quartz-integration 17:05 CIA-8 jralls quartz-integration * r41abe4a72f16 gtk+/ (4 files in 3 dirs): Merge branch 'master' into quartz-integration 17:05 CIA-8 jralls quartz-integration * r964b25d17b45 gtk+/ (35 files in 3 dirs): Merge branch 'master' into quartz-integration if there are patches for gtk-quartz, why are these inside at least three branches instead of being committed to corresponding main line one? i'm not the maintainer, but i'll just rapidly note that quartz-integration is not part of gtk-osx at this time. if and when GtkApplication takes on a palpably cross-platform feel, there may be some place for it within GTK, but right now it does stuff (e.g. management of the global menubar) that has no real slot within GTK. there are (at least) 3 modulesets because of the breakage that tends to happen with gtk-osx when parts of the gtk stack are modified by people who feel that its the role of the gtk-osx people to make the changes work on OS X. one is very old and stable (if broken) stuff; one is newer, with some patches and is generally OK; one corresponds to current git (or equivalent) for the whole GTK stack. the latter one tends to be unusable quite often; the first one is not bad but too old. ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Sep 6, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: okay, I've tried to get ahold of the gtk-osx project for a while, now, but since sf.net is just a joke and decided to reject my @gmail.com emails, let's try here. can we *please* stop this madness: 17:05 CIA-8 jralls quartz-integration * r7e37d94f2178 gtk+/ (10 files in 4 dirs): Merge branch 'master' into quartz-integration 17:05 CIA-8 jralls quartz-integration * rf75a882670a8 gtk+/ (9 files in 4 dirs): Merge branch 'master' into quartz-integration 17:05 CIA-8 jralls quartz-integration * r8c288f0f890e gtk+/ (24 files in 7 dirs): Merge branch 'master' into quartz-integration 17:05 CIA-8 jralls quartz-integration * r41abe4a72f16 gtk+/ (4 files in 3 dirs): Merge branch 'master' into quartz-integration 17:05 CIA-8 jralls quartz-integration * r964b25d17b45 gtk+/ (35 files in 3 dirs): Merge branch 'master' into quartz-integration if there are patches for gtk-quartz, why are these inside at least three branches instead of being committed to corresponding main line one? why are these branch continuously being merged instead of being rebased, if they are personal branches? why are the tools to make bundles and modulesets hosted on github instead of being on gnome.org? why is gtk-osx a separate project, with mailing lists hosted on sourceforge, instead of being on gnome.org? every time that a project maintainer decides to use sourceforge, the Universe kills a puppy. can we please, *please*, for the love of all that's nice and pure in this Universe, stop killing puppies? Emmanuele, You could have written me directly: my email address is in the git repositories, attached to the commits that you're complaining about. The tools and modulesets are on GitHub because that's where Richard Hult put them when he started 5 or 6 years ago and I haven't had time to change that since getting commit privs on git.gnome.org last year. What bothers you about it? Gtk-OSX is a separate project hosted on Sourceforge because Richard was using the facilities of his company, Imendio, which he had just dissolved. Those resources weren't available to me. The barriers to setting up a full project on Gnome including mailing lists, a bugtracker, web fora, source repositories, web pages, and ftp downloads seem daunting and time consuming -- while I (or anyone else) can have it set up on Sourceforge in a few hours with a single request. Sourceforge is working well hosting all of that stuff and no puppies are being killed -- nor is anything else bad happening. I'm sorry that you're irritated by the noise of the daily merges between master and quartz-integration, and between gtk-2.24 and gtk-2.24-quartz. Those tracking branches exist because I want to make it easy for application developers to use my changes to quartz, synchronized with the latest changes on the masters of each branch. Kris Reitveld asked me to wait until he reviews the patches to commit them to the mainline branches, and since his review is very valuable (he has a much deeper knowledge of the codebase than I do) I am complying with his request. If the noise from the merges is really that annoying I can easily move the quartz branches to Github and delete them from git.gnome.org. Regards, John Ralls ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On 2011-09-06 at 13:32, John Ralls wrote: if there are patches for gtk-quartz, why are these inside at least three branches instead of being committed to corresponding main line one? why are these branch continuously being merged instead of being rebased, if they are personal branches? why are the tools to make bundles and modulesets hosted on github instead of being on gnome.org? why is gtk-osx a separate project, with mailing lists hosted on sourceforge, instead of being on gnome.org? every time that a project maintainer decides to use sourceforge, the Universe kills a puppy. can we please, *please*, for the love of all that's nice and pure in this Universe, stop killing puppies? The tools and modulesets are on GitHub because that's where Richard Hult put them when he started 5 or 6 years ago and I haven't had time to change that since getting commit privs on git.gnome.org last year. What bothers you about it? that something that should be in a central location is not. in order to build gtk on OSX I have to hunt down various bits and blobs, and the barrier to contribution from me, a gtk developer, is higher. Gtk-OSX is a separate project hosted on Sourceforge because Richard was using the facilities of his company, Imendio, which he had just dissolved. Those resources weren't available to me. The barriers to setting up a full project on Gnome including mailing lists, a bugtracker, web fora, source repositories, web pages, and ftp downloads seem daunting and time consuming -- while I (or anyone else) can have it set up on Sourceforge in a few hours with a single request. Sourceforge is working well hosting all of that stuff and no puppies are being killed -- nor is anything else bad happening. sourceforge is working so well that it bounces and rejects my emails to the mailing lists for days. their bug tracking system is the scourge of the earth, and the mailing list archives are a joke. but those are moot points: the gtk resources *are* on gnome.org. why you need a separate mailing list and forum and bug tracker is beyond me: • once you have a Git account you can create repositories on git.gnome.org in 30 seconds; • the gtk bug tracking system in bugzilla.gnome.org; the Quartz backend specific bugs have a component under the gtk+ product; • the separate tools for OS X integration can get a separate product just by opening a bug on bugzilla.gnome.org; • the gtk website is hosted in git.gnome.org; the OS X integration should be part of that website; • downloads are available from download.gnome.org; • gtk has three mailing lists already: gtk-list, gtk-app-devel-list and gtk-devel-list; application and toolkit development on OS X is on topic on those three lists. there is no time consumption — just the willingness to cooperate in an open source project according to the rules of said open source project. I'm sorry that you're irritated by the noise of the daily merges between master and quartz-integration, I'm moderately irritated by the fact that the branch's history is immensely fucked up — but that's just because I'm OCD on the history in a revision control system. that is, however, *not* my issue. the issue is that those branches should *not* exist, unless they are personal development branches. if you plan on letting other users target them then you should get those commits merged into the main line and keep the patches in bugzilla, where the review for gtk fixes and enhancements happens. otherwise you're just forking gtk, and using the resources of the gtk project to give an aura of officiality to what is essentially your own personal project. ciao, Emmanuele. -- 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
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote: otherwise you're just forking gtk, and using the resources of the gtk project to give an aura of officiality to what is essentially your own personal project. I'd politely request that you stop using this tone in connection with this issue. There has always been a level of antagonism between developers working on GTK for OS X and the core development team. It rises and falls, and at present, things are generally in remarkably good shape, where most of what is required to get a fully functional GTK for OS X is right there in the tarball releases. But when you start ripping into one of the only people willing to actually step up and take any responsibility for the issues faced by those of us that actually want to use GTK+ as a cross-platform development toolkit where the platforms include OS X, its remarkably scary. Other people have walked away from the effort because of the perception of the core GTK guys just don't give a shit, and it doesn't help in any way that you take such an argumentative tone with john. I appreciate that you believe that using gnome.org's infrastructure is all incredibly easy. You've been using it for quite some time, and done most of the things that anyone might want to do with it. John hasn't, and his real goal is for all of the work that he or Kris (or occasionally even me) do to end up in GTK+ releases, without caring too much about how things get done *before* merging into the mainline. The attitude you're displaying here is just another reason for yet another person to walk away from that task, and its not as if there has ever been a queue of people waiting to take over what Richard and now John have done (similarly with Tor's work on the windows side of things). So please could you tone it down a bit, and rather than excoriate John for whatever you perceive his mistakes or whatever to be, focus on helpful suggestions. ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
On Sep 6, 2011, at 3:07 PM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: On 2011-09-06 at 13:32, John Ralls wrote: if there are patches for gtk-quartz, why are these inside at least three branches instead of being committed to corresponding main line one? why are these branch continuously being merged instead of being rebased, if they are personal branches? why are the tools to make bundles and modulesets hosted on github instead of being on gnome.org? why is gtk-osx a separate project, with mailing lists hosted on sourceforge, instead of being on gnome.org? every time that a project maintainer decides to use sourceforge, the Universe kills a puppy. can we please, *please*, for the love of all that's nice and pure in this Universe, stop killing puppies? The tools and modulesets are on GitHub because that's where Richard Hult put them when he started 5 or 6 years ago and I haven't had time to change that since getting commit privs on git.gnome.org last year. What bothers you about it? that something that should be in a central location is not. in order to build gtk on OSX I have to hunt down various bits and blobs, and the barrier to contribution from me, a gtk developer, is higher. Gtk-OSX is a separate project hosted on Sourceforge because Richard was using the facilities of his company, Imendio, which he had just dissolved. Those resources weren't available to me. The barriers to setting up a full project on Gnome including mailing lists, a bugtracker, web fora, source repositories, web pages, and ftp downloads seem daunting and time consuming -- while I (or anyone else) can have it set up on Sourceforge in a few hours with a single request. Sourceforge is working well hosting all of that stuff and no puppies are being killed -- nor is anything else bad happening. sourceforge is working so well that it bounces and rejects my emails to the mailing lists for days. their bug tracking system is the scourge of the earth, and the mailing list archives are a joke. but those are moot points: the gtk resources *are* on gnome.org. why you need a separate mailing list and forum and bug tracker is beyond me: • once you have a Git account you can create repositories on git.gnome.org in 30 seconds; • the gtk bug tracking system in bugzilla.gnome.org; the Quartz backend specific bugs have a component under the gtk+ product; • the separate tools for OS X integration can get a separate product just by opening a bug on bugzilla.gnome.org; • the gtk website is hosted in git.gnome.org; the OS X integration should be part of that website; • downloads are available from download.gnome.org; • gtk has three mailing lists already: gtk-list, gtk-app-devel-list and gtk-devel-list; application and toolkit development on OS X is on topic on those three lists. there is no time consumption — just the willingness to cooperate in an open source project according to the rules of said open source project. I'm sorry that you're irritated by the noise of the daily merges between master and quartz-integration, I'm moderately irritated by the fact that the branch's history is immensely fucked up — but that's just because I'm OCD on the history in a revision control system. that is, however, *not* my issue. the issue is that those branches should *not* exist, unless they are personal development branches. if you plan on letting other users target them then you should get those commits merged into the main line and keep the patches in bugzilla, where the review for gtk fixes and enhancements happens. otherwise you're just forking gtk, and using the resources of the gtk project to give an aura of officiality to what is essentially your own personal project. I'm not going to respond to most of that. Suffice it to say that building gtk-osx is largely automated, and there are well-tested instructions at http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/gtk-osx/wiki/Build I didn't get commit privs at Gnome.org until just under a year ago, 18 months after I took over from Richard. I still don't have privs on any of the other facilities except Bugzilla, and there only because I'm a Gnucash Dev. (That turns out to be sufficient for almost everything.) Gtk-OSX needs its own mailing list because it provides jhbuild modules for over 100 separate projects, not all of which are even Gnome. It's not feasible for me to monitor all of them for support, nor is it reasonable for users of my build scripts to have to figure out which one to use for any particular problem. It's not a fork of Gtk+ (yet, though on days like this one I get really tempted). I actually revived the gtk-osx project on SF; the previous version was an actual fork of Gtk1. As I explained earlier, the changes *are* patches, they *are* attached to bugs in Bugzilla, and Kris Reitveld *has* promised to review them. When he has had time to do so and they have been polished to his high standards, they
