Looking at http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewcvs/comps/comps-f9.xml.in?view=markup I find that Glade2 and Anjuta are marked as default and optional respectively. While Glade 3.4.1 (separate package from Glade2) is already there in the repositories, we are soon going to have a fresh new Anjuta package (atleast 2.2.3) in Fedora.
However, the latest versions of Anjuta -- both 2.2.3 (stable) and 2.3.x (unstable) -- need Glade3 for its Glade plugin to work. So can we consider replacing Glade2 by Glade3 in the comps-f9.xml.in for Fedora 9? As far as I know, this would affect the Live Developer Spin and the non-live GNOME DVD.
What do you think?
Cheerio, Debarshi
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 19:30 +0530, Debarshi 'Rishi' Ray wrote:
Looking at http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewcvs/comps/comps-f9.xml.in?view=markup I find that Glade2 and Anjuta are marked as default and optional respectively. While Glade 3.4.1 (separate package from Glade2) is already there in the repositories, we are soon going to have a fresh new Anjuta package (atleast 2.2.3) in Fedora.
However, the latest versions of Anjuta -- both 2.2.3 (stable) and 2.3.x (unstable) -- need Glade3 for its Glade plugin to work. So can we consider replacing Glade2 by Glade3 in the comps-f9.xml.in for Fedora 9? As far as I know, this would affect the Live Developer Spin and the non-live GNOME DVD.
What do you think?
I'd say that depends entirely on whether glade3 can handle all glade files produced by glade2. Can it ?
I'd say that depends entirely on whether glade3 can handle all glade files produced by glade2. Can it ?
http://glade.gnome.org/ says: "...respects the same XML format as glade-2" However, I am yet to verify the truthfulness of this claim. I plan to look into it once I am finished with Anjuta.
In case they are incompatible and we decide to continue with Glade2, then we might need to drop Anjuta, since Anjuta will most likely have Glade3 as a dependency. Or would we then want to split Anjuta into -plugins or -glade3?
Cheers, Debarshi
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 19:43 +0530, Debarshi 'Rishi' Ray wrote:
I'd say that depends entirely on whether glade3 can handle all glade files produced by glade2. Can it ?
http://glade.gnome.org/ says: "...respects the same XML format as glade-2" However, I am yet to verify the truthfulness of this claim. I plan to look into it once I am finished with Anjuta.
In case they are incompatible and we decide to continue with Glade2, then we might need to drop Anjuta, since Anjuta will most likely have Glade3 as a dependency. Or would we then want to split Anjuta into -plugins or -glade3?
I don't see any issue with letting glade2 and glade3 coexist for a while. And I don't expect there to be any explicit incompatibility, I just fear that there may be some issues when using glade3 on glade files that have been produced by glade2. Either way, I really hope that we will soon see a ui builder that supports the GtkBuilder format.
I don't see any issue with letting glade2 and glade3 coexist for a while.
Space on the Developer Spin LiveCD or the non-live GNOME DVD?
just fear that there may be some issues when using glade3 on glade files that have been produced by glade2.
Would it help to have Glade3 in the Fedora 9 Beta and Release Candidates ISOs in order to get a bit more widespread testing?
Cheerio, Debarshi
I don't see any issue with letting glade2 and glade3 coexist for a while. And I don't expect there to be any explicit incompatibility, I just fear that there may be some issues when using glade3 on glade files that have been produced by glade2. Either way, I really hope that we will soon see a ui builder that supports the GtkBuilder format.
Now that we are starting to see GtkBuilder support [1] in Glade3 can we finally push it as the "default on-media" package over Glade2?
Cheers, Debarshi
---- [1]
I've definitely seen problems with using glade-2 on files touched by glade-3 -- widgets losing properties such as expand/fill and such like.
Tim. */
I've definitely seen problems with using glade-2 on files touched by glade-3 -- widgets losing properties such as expand/fill and such like.
Have you tried them the other way round? Glade3 on Glade2 generated files?
Thanks, Debarshi
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 20:40 +0530, Debarshi 'Rishi' Ray wrote:
I've definitely seen problems with using glade-2 on files touched by glade-3 -- widgets losing properties such as expand/fill and such like.
Have you tried them the other way round? Glade3 on Glade2 generated files?
Yes, that seems to work fine.
Tim. */
It looks like Glade2 created files work fine with Glade3. Has anyone encountered anything different?
Cheers, Debarshi
On Tue, 2008-03-25 at 00:19 +0530, Debarshi Ray wrote:
It looks like Glade2 created files work fine with Glade3. Has anyone encountered anything different?
They do; however, once you have edited a glade file using glade-3, you can no longer edit it (and get correct results) using glade-2.
Tim. */
-
Debarshi Ray -
Jeremy Katz -
Matthias Clasen -
Tim Waugh