On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 07:28:04AM -0400, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 12:50:15PM +0200, Guido Günther wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 11:29:33AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > > Currently the virt-viewer codebase is written to build with both GTK-2 > > > > and GTK-3. This was primarily so that we could continue to support use > > > > of virt-viewer on older distros like RHEL-6 which lack GTK-3 support. > > > > GTK-3 has been around for 3 years now and RHEL-7 with GTK-3 support is > > > > not unreasonably far off in the future. > > > > > > I think that's a great idea! > > > > > > > So I'm thinking it could be a good time for us to drop support for > > > > GTK-2, and actually make use of some of the more interesting GTK-3 > > > > features we've been holding back on. In particular I think we should > > > > make use of the application menus in the GNOME shell top bar, and/or > > > > the new GTK design whereby apps have a drop down menu in their window > > > > titlebar. This would let us kill the current menu bar free'ing up > > > > more > > > > > > Besides of "help" this would probably be the window title bar > > > (GtkHeaderBar) since the actions are per window/wm (like attaching a > > > USB device). > > > > Oh and it also means we'd be able to depend on GSettings to store > > preferences, and not have to have two codepaths for GConf vs GSettings > > I am not fond of this change, because we have to continue support for > Windows (and other OS) and as you mentioned RHEL6. RHEL6 is going to be effetively bug-fix only mode once RHEL-7 comes out though, so we could continue support for that and other old distros, by having a stable branch off our last GTK2 release. > Afaik, gtk3 is not very well supported on Windows, because most popular Gtk+ > applications running on Windows are still using gtk2, so testing has been > very limited, and gtk3 is moving too quickly for Windows devs to follow. Oh I thought we were already shipping a GTK3 windows build, but it seems that we're merely testing it during autobuild.sh but then forcing GTK2 for MSI builds :-( > I am aware of some of the issues we have with gtk2 vs gtk3, but I think > it's still possible to maintain both. Sure, we could continue to support both, but if we want to take advantage of new GTK3 features it's going to mean adding a lot more #ifdef conditional code. We can certainly do that if we think GTK2 is still important enough, but I was just hoping that we're at a switch-over point by now. If we don't do it now, then it would be a good idea to set ourselves a future target for when to drop GTK2 support. eg perhaps we say we aim to drop it 1st July 2015 ? > Furthermore, I think fancier UI/design and integration with GNOME should go > in Boxes instead. I'm not really talking about fancy integration with GNOME here, just taking advantage of current GTK-3 features and following best practice recommended design. I don't think existance of Boxes is a reason for not taking advantage of current state of the art GTK3 features. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ virt-tools-list mailing list virt-tools-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/virt-tools-list
