Le mercredi 09 mai 2012 à 09:03 -0700, Hubert Figuière a écrit :
> On 09/05/12 02:38 AM, Ingo Brückl wrote:
> >
> > Comparing both .ui file types, there is not much difference between them.
> > Besides some horizontal/vertical issues with all kind of boxes and some combo
> > box issues (which we could overcome better by creating model and renderer in
> > the .cpp code, but anyway), they are identical.
> >
> > Why don't we get rid of two versions of the same file and find a way to
> > somehow make the different parts configurable - either by creating them from
> > .in files or by a perl script? The advantage of having just one .ui file is
> > obvious, both builds, GTK2 and GTK3 would benefit from fixes and/or
> > adjustments and neither will be forgotten. Also, maintenance is much easier.
> >
> > If there is common consent that this is desirable I'd do all the work on it,
> > but I'd need someone to test on GTK3, i.e. getting feedback whether the
> > combined .ui file is ok.
>
> Simply put that way, because we are gonna drop Gtk2 anyway, it is
> pointless to spend more time on this.
>
> And make .ui file uneditable with Glade is worst than anything else.
>
> Hub
+1, and there is still work to do on the gtk3 ui file such as replacing
the deprecated GtkTable by GtkGrid.
Jean
Received on Wed May 9 18:27:27 2012
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed May 09 2012 - 18:27:27 CEST