Re: [Scrollkeeper-devel] scrollkeeper-0.3.x and GNOME 1.4.x

[Joe M. C. <ma...@Fr...>]

On Mon, 2002-05-27 at 09:13, John Fleck wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-05-26 at 23:46, Dan Mueth wrote:
> >=20
> >=20
> > For FreeBSD, I'd recommend just using GNOME 1.4.x with the latest stabl=
e
> > ScrollKeeper (0.2.0), which should work fine.  (Note that ScrollKeeper
> > 0.3.x is the developer-only series.)  GNOME 2.0 and ScrollKeeper 0.4.0
> > should work together well and be out in a month or two.  After that, th=
e
> > use of versioned DTDs and stylesheets should allow us to maintain=20
> > backwards compatibility.
> >=20
>=20
> But there are likely to be mixed systems out there for a long time to
> come. One of the premises of GNOME2 is that a lot of old GNOME1 apps
> will not be ported in the near term, and therefore both systems should
> be able to run in parallel.
>=20
> In addition, to the extent ScrollKeeper has been adopted more widely,
> there may be other old-style OMF files remaining in the wild.
>=20
> Is it possible to make the newer versions (SK>3.6 or whenever the new
> DTD came into use) more tolerant of the error caused by an old OMF that
> doesn't validate against the DTD?

I agree.  We have users that want to test the GNOME 2 desktop, but love
Evolution and Galeon.  Obviously, we don't allow installation of the
GNOME 1.4 desktop in parallel with the GNOME 2 desktop, but I would like
to maintain one SK if possible.  Barring that, I could add a SK2 port
for SK-0.3.6, and work that into GNOME 2.  That's assuming the GNOME 1.4
libraries like it, though.

In any event, this feedback has been very useful.  I see some other
Linux distros are running into the same problem, but they are not as
picky about package list contents I guess.  I have to account for every
file installed by each package :-}.

Joe

>=20
> Cheers,
> John
> --=20
> John Fleck
> jf...@in... (h) jf...@ab... (w)
> http://www.inkstain.net http://www.abqjournal.com
>=20
> "You don't want to die with the music still in you."
>  - John Gardner
>=20
>=20