On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 03:43:51PM -0500, Kelly Martin <kmartin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If you have to use a "development" version at least pick a fixed point
> in development and use that. Otherwise you're coding to not one, but
> two moving targets: your own code PLUS the moving code in the library
> you depend on. Or, in this case, five.
>
> If your goal is to make development as chaotic and difficult as
> possible, you are on the right track.
I am sorry, but what you describe is reality for most plug-in authors. Did
plug-in developers develop for gtk-1.0 and gimp-1.0 a year ago?
It's more of a social problem: do we *trust* the gtk development model to
be stable most of the time? I did trust the gimp developers that they want
working code as well, and it worked fine. If gtk+ is as chaotic as you
think it is, it is evry bad and gimp shouldn't use the HEAD revision.
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg@xxxxxxxx |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
