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
On Oct 11, 2011, at 3:18 PM, Paul Davis wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:11 PM, John Ralls 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
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:11 PM, John Ralls 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.
_
Great stuff! Thanks a lot for the effort John, good job! :-)
2011/10/10 John Ralls
> 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
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 replac
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
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 other
On 9 September 2011 14:58, Allin Cottrell 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 t
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
On 8 September 2011 23:42, Olav Vitters 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 conc
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 cus
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-deve
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
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 mod
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-dev
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
Forgot to "Reply All" :-)
-- Forwarded message --
From: Alberto Ruiz
Date: 2011/9/8
Subject: Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity
To: John Ralls
2011/9/8 John Ralls
>
> The rest of Gtk-OSX isn't Gtk. It's a build system using jhbuild with its
> ow
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.
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. You
l.
> 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
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
2011/9/7 Javier Jardón :
> On 7 September 2011 15:26, Federico Mena Quintero 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 commit
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++)
> {
>
On 7 September 2011 15:26, Federico Mena Quintero 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 numb
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
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Milan Bouchet-Valat 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 f
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
hi Paul;
On 2011-09-06 at 18:18, Paul Davis wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Emmanuele Bassi 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 polite
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
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Emmanuele Bassi 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 i
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 branc
On Sep 6, 2011, at 11:41 AM, Paul Davis wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:12 PM, 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 *pleas
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-in
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:12 PM, 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-in
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):
35 matches
Mail list logo
