On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 23:24, John Stowers wrote:
>
>> > >
>> > > John
>> > >
>> > > [1] http://github.com/nzjrs/pygtk/commits/gtk-3.0
>> > > [2] http://github.com/nzjrs/pygobject/tree/gtk-3.0
>>
>> What's the status of this now? Is there every likely to be a pygtk
>> release for GTK+ 3?
>>
>
> I
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 08:59, Mike Emmel wrote:
> In my years of working on embedded linux I've seen the embedded
> community do and awful lot of taking from the opensource community and
> very little in the way of giving back. Perhaps the decision to remove
> DirectFB support can serve is a bit
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 13:35, Matthias Clasen
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 6:10 AM, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Yeah, I get it, but here's the point: it isn't nice when a maintainer
>> says "unlikely" without giving even one reason,
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 11:59, Martyn Russell wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 09:54 +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 01:16, Matthias Clasen
>> > That may be, but 'disable this random set of widgets I don't need'
>> > patches
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:23, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>> Is it good enough that the maintainer doesn't even give a reason?
>
> It is good enough for me. I admire a maintainer that doesn't let
> everything turn into bikeshedding.
A short explanation would be far better than just "we are unlikely to
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:05, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>> Why do they have little chance of going upstream?
>
> Because the maintainer says so?
Is it good enough that the maintainer doesn't even give a reason? Did
I miss something?
--
blog: http://tshepang.tumblr.com
_
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 01:16, Matthias Clasen
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 7:02 PM, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
>> 2010/6/14 Sam Thursfield :
>>> A more socially-minded approach would be to work on the problem of
>>> sharing a GTK+ runtime between all apps on a system. It's perhaps not
>>> an easy p
On 3/3/07, Ben Combee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just realized that GLIb 2.12.9 had been released almost a month ago
> after seeing it mentioned in a message here. Is there a reason that
> the main page of gtk.org doesn't have any 2007 updates?
It's just an issue of manpower. Look at: http://
Looking here:
http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.0/glib/glib-Key-value-file-parser.html
under the section describing differences between .ini files and key
files I find this:
* Key files allow only comments before the first group.
I saw a typical key file and found comments could be put anywher
On 7/2/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any document like this:
> http://www.sunsite.ualberta.ca/Documentation/Graphics/by-node/gtk+-1.1.1/gtk_toc.html
>
> Showing the internal details of GTK. This one is pretty outdated(almost 9
> yrs old) and incomplete. I wante
On 6/12/07, Kristian Rietveld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 10:38:44AM +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > There's also a new GtkTooltip object. Could we have some more information
> > about how this should be used and if it replaces any existing API, please?
>
> Sure ;) As Mat
On 5/10/07, Attilio Fiandrotti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One more thing: i often need to disturb mike or loic to get patches
> cheched in, may i get write access to gnome's svn repo to manage the
> directfb backend?
Check this out:
http://developer.gnome.org/doc/policies/accounts/requesting.htm
On 4/27/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> using svn blame gtkfaq.sgml and svn blame gtk-faq.sgml,
> it looks like gtkfaq.sgml is a fair bit older. if you
> can verify that gtk-faq.sgml contains everything from
> gtkfaq.sgml and more, we can remove gtkfaq.sgml from SVN.
Shown below are 2 d
On 4/23/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wonder if gtk.org is still hosted at Berkeley as mentioned here:
> http://gtk.org/about.html. I also wonder if we I should get rid of the
> 2nd paragraph or write
Hi,
I wonder if gtk.org is still hosted at Berkeley as mentioned here:
http://gtk.org/about.html. I also wonder if we I should get rid of the
2nd paragraph or write it in past tense. How about the third
paragraph?
--
my place on the web:
floss-and-misc.blogspot.com
__
On 4/23/07, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am thinking of doing this in 2 stages:
>
> 1. Remove all the unnecessary files and have a general clean up and
> reorganise.
> 2. Restyle the site.
I can't wait for those updates. I also don't have too much time but
please state if you want
On 4/23/07, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Christophe Dehais wrote:
> > On 4/23/07, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Questions:
> >> ==
> >> • Does anyone else have any further suggestions at this stage?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > What about refreshing gtk logo in the
On 4/12/07, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> > On 4/12/07, Gian Mario Tagliaretti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> 2007/4/12, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>
> >> Hi Tshepang,
> >&
On 4/12/07, Gian Mario Tagliaretti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2007/4/12, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi Tshepang,
> Here's a minor patch. Please commit...
you probably forgot the attachment.
pretty embarass
Here's a minor patch. Please commit...
--
my place on the web:
floss-and-misc.blogspot.com
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Hi,
Here's another patch, albeit a small one.
Index: ChangeLog
===
--- ChangeLog (revision 573)
+++ ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+2007-04-10 Tshepang Lekhonkhobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ * box_middle.html: updat
Anyone with some time and commit rights please:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Tshepang Lekhonkhobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mar 29, 2007 11:02 AM
Subject: [WEB PATCH] towards making gtk website valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional
To: gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
Hi,
Here's an
tion.html (working copy)
@@ -1,7 +1,4 @@
-
-
-GTK+ - Introduction
-
+
Index: ChangeLog
===
--- ChangeLog (revision 572)
+++ ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,48 @@
+2007-03-29 Tshepang Lekhonkhobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
+ * glib-1.2-NEWS.html:
+ * gtk-2.10-notes.html:
+ * section_end.html:
+ * gtk-2.1
On 3/16/07, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The directory 'trunk/debian' in svn is nearly 10 years old and I
> wonder who still uses it. Shouldn't it get removed?
anyone out there?
___
gtk-devel
On 3/20/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Mar 2007, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Here's the changelog entries of my changes to the webpages which I
> > hope you'll apply to SVN:
>
> thanks for your effort.
Hi,
The directory 'trunk/debian' in svn is nearly 10 years old and I
wonder who still uses it. Shouldn't it get removed?
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
On 3/16/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2007, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
>
> > On 3/15/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 15 Mar 2007, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
>
> >> > It makes NEWS section i
On 3/15/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> On 3/14/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> such a patch should change the pages needing updates and update the
>> gtk-web/ChangeLog. also patches should be gen
On 3/14/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> such a patch should change the pages needing updates and update the
> gtk-web/ChangeLog. also patches should be generated with diff -up.
I have a patch attached which makes use of 'svn diff' and wonder if
that's enough. It makes NEWS section in tr
On 3/15/07, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/15/07, Emmanuele Bassi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 06:01 +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> > > * I don't know too much how web technologies work but I expected that
On 3/15/07, Emmanuele Bassi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 06:01 +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> > On 3/14/07, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 3/14/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
On 3/14/07, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/14/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> > > Should we send patches to this list I suppose?
> >
> > for the moment, yes.
>
On 3/14/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
>
> > On 3/14/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> we appreciate contributions, e.g. patches against the SVN
> >> module that hosts the web site:
On 3/14/07, Tim Janik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> we appreciate contributions, e.g. patches against the SVN
> module that hosts the web site:
>
>http://svn.gnome.org/svn/gtk-web/
>
> such a patch should change the pages needing updates and update the
> gtk-web/ChangeLog. also patches should be
34 matches
Mail list logo
