Re: [java-gnome-hackers] a possible merge strategy

[Stefan P. <st...@pr...>]

Hi Colin,

On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 10:34 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> Anyways - so you are saying you want to continue on java-gnome's path
> of being a hand-crafted API for some parts of GTK+ and below,
> continuing to expect that at some point many new people will appear
> and write/maintain bindings with custom documentation for every
> GObject library out there?  You see no role for having a correct
> generated API to fill in gaps in the wide variety of libraries
> java-gnome hasn't even looked at?

Provoking question :)

I would put it differently. We already use autogenerated APIs but take a
different approach then you do. This may be combined but it will be a
tough piece of work. I'd like to see cooperation on that part.

Regarding coverage: If we chose to go your way for the yet not covered
APIs and provide an unreviewed public API, we can not change the API
later on if we find it unsuitable since this would break compatibility.
So we would need to review every covered API down to every method. This
is in fact the same level of work we now have when we review and cover
APIs provided from our code generator.

Or let me put your provoking question the other way around: You prefer
to risk having a crappy API which cannot be changed later just to have
the API immediately? 

Cheers,
  Stefan-who-hopes-this-won't-end-in-a-flame-war