On Fri, 1 Jul 2016 06:18:28 +0200, Adam wrote in message
<20160701041828.GC5044@???>:

> 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:

..appears "we" are "upgrading" Chromium to GTK3 now:
http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/c/chromium-browser/chromium-browser_52.0.2743.82-4_changelog

> Firefox (was in 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!


--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.