On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 06:18:28AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 04:40:30AM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
> > I'm currently packaging recent geeqie for Ubuntu Trustry
> > (which I'm still running on my notebook), and that leads me
> > to an interesting question:
> >
> > How to properly package applications that can be built for
> > gtk2 vs. gtk3 ?
>
> I'd say GTK3 doesn't "have regressions", but "it's one big regression".
> Just to name a few: CSD, font selection dialog, file open/save dialog, etc.
>
> However, I see most project which didn't abandon the GTK ship altogether
> (Chromium, LXDE, etc) downgrading to GTK3 these days: Firefox (was in

Typo? Or is there a GTK4 they are downgrading from? Or have I
completely misunderstood? (I'm not being sarcastic; misunderstanding
happens often enough.)

> unstable, reverted for now), MATE (already), Xfce (not yet done upstream),
> etc. Thus, it looks like we'll suffer it in the long run.
>
> > Should we have two separate packages (eg. geeqie-gtk2 vs.
> > geeqie-gtk3) ?
>
> I'd bother only if you care about Gnome3. And as we're on dng rather than
> debian-devel, I guess you don't.
>
> > And how to handle other optional features (eg. lirc support) ?
>
> Typically the answer is "include everything unless it'd pull _really_ fat
> dependencies, and even then the optional stuff should still be packaged",
> but it depends on whom you package it for. Best to use your best judgement.
>
>
> Meow!
> --
> An imaginary friend squared is a real enemy.
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng