Thread: [Java-gnome-developer] Namespaces
Brought to you by:
afcowie
From: <una...@ve...> - 2007-08-24 12:31:24
|
Hello, To the point: GNOME is closely tied to GTK+ but GTK+ is much broader than GNOME. There are many projects that use GTK+ but don't use any of GNOME's libraries to limit dependencies or for other reasons. Java GTK+ bindings are at a disadvantage to other bindings, say Gtk#, because of the late start. They will need all the developer mind share that they can get. It is reasonable to expect that the authors of the bindings are proponents of Java and would like the bindings to be as popular as possible too. Therefore, separating the bundle into sub-libraries is a move that makes the most sense, and in particular, separating GTK+ from GNOME. It would be unrealistic to expect, for example, Windows users to install GNOME libraries on their system to run GTK+ programs such as the GIMP, Inkscape or future ones written in Java. But I assume that after java-gnome is mature enough, this will happen. Furthermore: The new incarnation of java-gnome wrappers is still relatively young and there aren't many programs that use it. This means that making incompatible changes is still cheap. That is why I would like to ask the developers to drop “gnome” from most of the namespaces, i.e. change: org.gnome.gtk -> org.gtk, org.gnome.gdk -> org.gtk.gdk and similarly for whichever namespaces are used that contain classes that are independent from GNOME itself (org.pango, org.cairographics?). This is how it was done in the previous java-gnome. Presently the bindings are giving developers the impression that they are closely tied to GNOME, and one of the reasons for that are the namespaces. However, if the libraries are split after the bindings are already popular, the gnome namespace will likely remain for compatibility reasons. I believe that this move is the right thing to do and the best time to do it is now. Of course, this is not something that will have a huge practical impact, but personally I find such details important. I voice my opinion because I care about these bindings and will probably use them if they are made well enough. Thank you for bearing with me. -- Unavowed |
From: Andrew C. <an...@op...> - 2007-08-24 13:45:26
|
On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 13:31 +0100, someone with no name wrote: > That is why I would like to ask the developers to drop =E2=80=9Cgnome=E2= =80=9D from > most of the namespaces, No. ++ 1) You've got it all backwards. These are the bindings allowing you to write GNOME programs from Java. GTK is of course very important as the GUI toolkit used to do so - and so central to much of our work - but GNOME is the platform. 2) The namespaces were picked during the 4.0 re-engineering design effort. We did talk about this 18 months ago, and a decision was made then. ++ To answer your other question, the namespace for the Cairo bindings is org.freedesktop.cairo AfC Sydney --=20 Andrew Frederick Cowie Managing Director Operational Dynamics Consulting, Pty Ltd Sydney +61 2 9977 6866 New York +1 646 472 5054 Toronto +1 647 477 5603 London +44 207 1019201 We are an operations engineering consultancy focusing on strategy, organizational architecture, systems review, and change management procedures: enabling successful use of open source in mission critical enterprises, worldwide. http://www.operationaldynamics.com/ |
From: Nicola L. <nic...@gm...> - 2007-08-24 13:58:14
|
I would agree with Unavowed on the dependency issue. The fact that these are indeed Gnome bindings in the first place doesn't mean you can't make things modular. I don't know the actual state of the art (i'm waiting newer releases), but i'd like very much to be able to write a gtk program without dependencies on gnome. About the packages name, that is less important and can well stay as it is. That was just my opinion. Good work, Nicola On 8/24/07, Andrew Cowie <an...@op...> wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 13:31 +0100, someone with no name wrote: > > That is why I would like to ask the developers to drop "gnome" from > > most of the namespaces, > > No. > > ++ > > 1) You've got it all backwards. These are the bindings allowing you to > write GNOME programs from Java. GTK is of course very important as the > GUI toolkit used to do so - and so central to much of our work - but > GNOME is the platform. > > 2) The namespaces were picked during the 4.0 re-engineering design > effort. We did talk about this 18 months ago, and a decision was made > then. > > ++ > > To answer your other question, the namespace for the Cairo bindings is > org.freedesktop.cairo > > AfC > Sydney > > -- > Andrew Frederick Cowie > Managing Director > Operational Dynamics Consulting, Pty Ltd > > Sydney +61 2 9977 6866 > New York +1 646 472 5054 > Toronto +1 647 477 5603 > London +44 207 1019201 > > We are an operations engineering consultancy focusing on strategy, > organizational architecture, systems review, and change management > procedures: enabling successful use of open source in mission > critical enterprises, worldwide. > > http://www.operationaldynamics.com/ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. > Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. > Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ > _______________________________________________ > java-gnome-developer mailing list > jav...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/java-gnome-developer > > > |