On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 22:59:11 +0200, <pcg@xxxxxxxx ( Marc) (A.) (Lehmann )> said: >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. Why should we expect the GTK+ developers to keep their HEAD revision compilable at every moment? That is a completely unreasonable expectation in the first place. If I were a GTK+ developer I would be asking that you NOT do what you're proposing because it creates pressure on them to keep their HEAD "workable" at all times instead of doing what they need to do in order to further their own development. If GTK stable release (1.2) is not acceptable for further development in the GIMP (which it probably is not), I would strongly urge picking a relatively stable snapshot of GTK+ current development (possibly, but not necessarily HEAD today) and use that. We might have to adjust later to any changes GTK+ makes to its HEAD after that snapshot, but at least we won't have to adjust to them willy-nilly as they make them. Kelly
