On 13 June 2011 13:32, Martin Nordholts <enselic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2011/6/13 Ãyvind KolÃs <pippin@xxxxxxxx>: >> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Martin Nordholts <enselic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> First of all, I think the name should be gegl-ui, not gegl-gtk, in >>> case we want to provide a widget for say Qt. >>> >>> I support moving the UI stuff into a separate git repository; it will >>> be nice to have separate commit histories. >> >> Having a library that depends on a lot of different UI frameworks >> might not be conductive to encourage adoption. Since this would mean >> that in distributions you would be pulling in the packages for all the >> possible dependencies when wanting only one of them. >> >> There is already a Clutter based GEGL integration library, and to me >> it makes sense for there to be separate ones for different ui >> toolkits. >> >> http://git.clutter-project.org/clutter-gegl/ > > It would be separate libraries, just a common git repository. But I've > changed my mind, it probably makes most sense to have one git repo per > target toolkit anyway and call the GTK one gegl-gtk. > I had the same thought, and eventually ended with the same conclusion: different repos. I actually started some Qt stuff but realized I get enough of that in my day-job. So GTK first, then we'll see. Ãyvind: please give your explicit OK to the relisencing. I now have a repo with the code split out. The .pc files need a bit of love, after that it is ready for the first push. I will need someone else to add the gegl-gtk bugzilla component though, but that is secondary. -- Jon Nordby - www.jonnor.com _______________________________________________ Gegl-developer mailing list Gegl-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer
