On Sat, 2004-06-12 at 12:09 -0500, Jens Knutson wrote: > Changing your tone to one that is less inflammatory and (especially) > less accusatory would help your case quite a bit. You know what they > say about the trapping of insects with sweets instead of vinegar... Perhaps true.. It's not my intention to be that inflammatory in my tone. It's just that I 'am' stunned about multiple issues (see my previous post for a list). [cut] > 2.2.0 is the latest stable version, so that may answer your question > about why Fedora uses such an "old" pygtk2. (Also, it was only released > in March - is that really so old?) > > There have been many 2.3 releases since March, but as the odd minor > version number indicates, this is still unstable. While Fedora is > cutting edge, it doesn't ship much beta software - certainly they > shouldn't for something as critical as the bindings for the system- > config-* tools. > > All that said, it will be rather nice when PyGTK fully supports gtk 2.4. > Not being able to assist with the effort, though, I'll not complain > about it. But then again, I am not complaining about PyGTK (well, not the current development versions). But I am about the fact that Fedora is using an incomplete Gtk+ binding for something as critical as the system-config-* tools. It's already causing pieces of code that is less maintainable. Since developers are, at this moment, doing hacks to get simple things working. -- Philip Van Hoof, Software Developer @ Cronos home: me at freax dot org work: Philip dot VanHoof at cronos dot be http://www.freax.be, http://www.freax.eu.org -- Fedora-config-list mailing list Fedora-config-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-config-list