Re: GLib plans for next cycle

2011-09-01 Thread Colin Walters
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Ryan Lortie wrote: > > All of it except the source API changes is dependent on the libgthread > merge. I see that now - makes sense. > This was a separate branch, actually, but I just nuked it to reduce the > noise of all the branches I've been pushing.  I'll spli

Re: GLib plans for next cycle

2011-09-01 Thread Ryan Lortie
hi Colin, On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 16:13 -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > There's a huge amount of stuff here - how much of this is really > dependent? Feature branches are just way easier to review than one > big "stuff". All of it except the source API changes is dependent on the libgthread merge.

Re: GLib plans for next cycle

2011-09-01 Thread Colin Walters
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Ryan Lortie wrote: > An update. > > On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 11:50 -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote: >> I'm working on some plans for things I want to do in GLib at the start >> of the next cycle.  I'd do them now, but it's getting late. > > I created a wip/glib-next branch an

Re: GLib plans for next cycle

2011-09-01 Thread Colin Walters
On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Ryan Lortie wrote: > >>  - glib_get_worker_context() > > Done. Would strongly prefer this API is not public. See: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=657992 ___ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.or

Re: GLib plans for next cycle

2011-09-01 Thread Ryan Lortie
An update. On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 11:50 -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote: > I'm working on some plans for things I want to do in GLib at the start > of the next cycle. I'd do them now, but it's getting late. I created a wip/glib-next branch and started working on a lot of these ideas. I started by mergi

Re: GLib plans for next cycle

2011-09-01 Thread Dan Winship
On 08/31/2011 03:31 PM, Kevin Fox wrote: > Maybe the time to discuss pulling in an api something like Grand Central > Dispatch has arrived? :) I was thinking it would be nice to integrate with GThreadPool somehow, but I didn't have any specific idea of how that would work... -- Dan __

Re: GTK+ 4.0 and Clutter 2.0: rainbows and unicorns

2011-09-01 Thread Emmanuele Bassi
hi; On 2011-09-01 at 11:18, Andres G. Aragoneses wrote: > Small question Emanuelle: > > On 08/31/2011 04:10 PM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: > >... > >Giovanni Campagna recently submitted a GDK backend for Clutter[0] which > >I'm fairly keen on merging during 1.9 (the cycle for Gnome 3.4) and > >usin

Re: GTK+ 4.0 and Clutter 2.0: rainbows and unicorns

2011-09-01 Thread Andres G. Aragoneses
Small question Emanuelle: On 08/31/2011 04:10 PM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: > Giovanni Campagna recently submitted a GDK backend for Clutter[0]which > I'm fairly keen on merging during 1.9 (the cycle for Gnome 3.4) and > using as the default backend when compiled on X11. Oh, does that mean that a