|
| From: | Gotam Gorabh |
| Subject: | Re: GNUnet-developers Digest, Vol 224, Issue 11 |
| Date: | Wed, 28 Feb 2024 13:48:05 +0530 |
Note, however, that it will also mean writing a lot of code that is
currently hidden behind those glade XML files.
OTOH moving to a WIP RAD tool is also not such a smart idea, maybe. But that depends on the maturity of cambalanche.
So I would very strongly recommend using Cambalance --- and
to use the opportunity to clean up the GUIs ;-).
I think GNOME published a blog post for porting from GTK3 to GTK4 as
well.
Send GNUnet-developers mailing list submissions to
gnunet-developers@gnu.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
gnunet-developers-request@gnu.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
gnunet-developers-owner@gnu.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of GNUnet-developers digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Gotam Gorabh)
2. Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Schanzenbach, Martin)
3. Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Christian Grothoff)
4. Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Jacki)
5. GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade (Gotam Gorabh)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:49:20 +0530
From: Gotam Gorabh <gautamy672@gmail.com>
To: gnunet-developers@gnu.org
Subject: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade
Message-ID:
<CAH7AZZz1iHPEkSQXJn2WWWT-t1YOKyCbQTV94cqo8wgC5UTSFw@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">CAH7AZZz1iHPEkSQXJn2WWWT-t1YOKyCbQTV94cqo8wgC5UTSFw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hello Martin,
Note that migration from gtk3 to gtk4 especially for gnunet-gtk is not
> trivial: We use libglade, which does not exist for gtk4.
> We will need to decide if we want to migrate to something like
> https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/ or
> something different entirely.
>
Why can't we use the proper GObject concept like other gnome application
does? E.g. GNOME Settings, Nautilus, etc. which can handle the properties,
and signals in a structured way.
Thanks. Regards
Gotam Gorabh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnunet-developers/attachments/20240228/1a62b873/attachment.htm>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 20:51:50 +0100
From: "Schanzenbach, Martin" <schanzen@gnunet.org>
To: gnunet-developers@gnu.org
Subject: Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade
Message-ID: <f4f2ae09-4a76-48ab-8371-3f92dd663f6e@gnunet.org" target="_blank">f4f2ae09-4a76-48ab-8371-3f92dd663f6e@gnunet.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
I think our use of glade is historical.
It just made sense to somebody (not me, my guess is Christian).
I personally have no issue with moving away from glade as RAD tool as I
find it very cumbersome myself.
Note, however, that it will also mean writing a lot of code that is
currently hidden behind those glade XML files.
OTOH moving to a WIP RAD tool is also not such a smart idea, maybe. But
that depends on the maturity of cambalanche, which I cannot judge myself
right now as I have never tried it.
BR
On 27.02.24 20:19, Gotam Gorabh wrote:
> Hello Martin,
>
> Note that migration from gtk3 to gtk4 especially for gnunet-gtk is not
> trivial: We use libglade, which does not exist for gtk4.
> We will need to decide if we want to migrate to something like
> https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/
> <https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/> or
> something different entirely.
>
>
> Why can't we use the proper GObject concept like other gnome application
> does? E.g. GNOME Settings, Nautilus, etc. which can handle the
> properties, and signals in a structured way.
>
> Thanks. Regards
>
> Gotam Gorabh
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 20:58:36 +0100
From: Christian Grothoff <grothoff@gnunet.org>
To: gnunet-developers@gnu.org
Subject: Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade
Message-ID: <7c92b3da-bac5-4b34-8472-69b9fbeb5f3f@gnunet.org" target="_blank">7c92b3da-bac5-4b34-8472-69b9fbeb5f3f@gnunet.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Let me just say this: using a RAD tool like Glade is just the only
logical thing, it is 1000% more productive for UX development then doing
the building of Gtk objects by hand. So for the sake of sanity, please
use *some* RAD tool. Besides, AFAIK GtkBuilder isn't deprecated, just
Glade itself is being rewritten/replaced. We used Glade for quite a
while despite it being WIP/in beta, with GNOME's reluctance to declare
something stable I'm not sure a WIP RAD tool is inherently a bad idea.
But I *am* sure that doing gtk_box_add() by hand is the road to
insanity. So I would very strongly recommend using Cambalance --- and
to use the opportunity to clean up the GUIs ;-).
On 2/27/24 20:51, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote:
> I think our use of glade is historical.
> It just made sense to somebody (not me, my guess is Christian).
>
> I personally have no issue with moving away from glade as RAD tool as I
> find it very cumbersome myself.
> Note, however, that it will also mean writing a lot of code that is
> currently hidden behind those glade XML files.
>
> OTOH moving to a WIP RAD tool is also not such a smart idea, maybe. But
> that depends on the maturity of cambalanche, which I cannot judge myself
> right now as I have never tried it.
>
> BR
>
> On 27.02.24 20:19, Gotam Gorabh wrote:
>> Hello Martin,
>>
>> Note that migration from gtk3 to gtk4 especially for gnunet-gtk is
>> not
>> trivial: We use libglade, which does not exist for gtk4.
>> We will need to decide if we want to migrate to something like
>> https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/
>>
>> <https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/> or
>> something different entirely.
>>
>>
>> Why can't we use the proper GObject concept like other gnome
>> application does? E.g. GNOME Settings, Nautilus, etc. which can
>> handle the properties, and signals in a structured way.
>>
>> Thanks. Regards
>>
>> Gotam Gorabh
>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 01:20:16 +0100
From: Jacki <jacki@thejackimonster.de>
To: gnunet-developers@gnu.org
Subject: Re: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade
Message-ID:
<edad1b98ab349d08166335312b03f6c5737b69fb.camel@thejackimonster.de" target="_blank">edad1b98ab349d08166335312b03f6c5737b69fb.camel@thejackimonster.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Exactly. In GTK3 you can still use Glade but import the UI files via
GtkBuilder. In GTK4 they adjusted widgets quite a bit. So instead of
Glade you need to use Cambalache because Glade won't be ported over. In
fact Cambalache is developed by one of the core contributors behind
Glade.
Since Camabalache is still in development we could port over to GTK3
using GtkBuilder with designing UI in Glade though. The required
changes from GTK3 to GTK4 shouldn't be huge in most cases. Cambalache
also supports converting the UI files from GTK3 to GTK4.
I think GNOME published a blog post for porting from GTK3 to GTK4 as
well.
But I assume it's also possible to use Cambalache already. Most
important functionality should work.
BR
Jacki
On Tue, 2024-02-27 at 20:58 +0100, Christian Grothoff wrote:
> Let me just say this: using a RAD tool like Glade is just the only
> logical thing, it is 1000% more productive for UX development then
> doing
> the building of Gtk objects by hand. So for the sake of sanity,
> please
> use *some* RAD tool. Besides, AFAIK GtkBuilder isn't deprecated, just
> Glade itself is being rewritten/replaced. We used Glade for quite a
> while despite it being WIP/in beta, with GNOME's reluctance to
> declare
> something stable I'm not sure a WIP RAD tool is inherently a bad
> idea.
> But I *am* sure that doing gtk_box_add() by hand is the road to
> insanity. So I would very strongly recommend using Cambalance ---
> and
> to use the opportunity to clean up the GUIs ;-).
>
> On 2/27/24 20:51, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote:
> > I think our use of glade is historical.
> > It just made sense to somebody (not me, my guess is Christian).
> >
> > I personally have no issue with moving away from glade as RAD tool
> > as I
> > find it very cumbersome myself.
> > Note, however, that it will also mean writing a lot of code that is
> > currently hidden behind those glade XML files.
> >
> > OTOH moving to a WIP RAD tool is also not such a smart idea, maybe.
> > But
> > that depends on the maturity of cambalanche, which I cannot judge
> > myself
> > right now as I have never tried it.
> >
> > BR
> >
> > On 27.02.24 20:19, Gotam Gorabh wrote:
> > > Hello Martin,
> > >
> > > Note that migration from gtk3 to gtk4 especially for gnunet-
> > > gtk is
> > > not
> > > trivial: We use libglade, which does not exist for gtk4.
> > > We will need to decide if we want to migrate to something
> > > like
> > >
> > > https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-released/
> > >
> > > <
> > > https://blogs.gnome.org/xjuan/2023/09/28/cambalache-0-16-0-release
> > > d/> or
> > > something different entirely.
> > >
> > >
> > > Why can't we use the proper GObject concept like other gnome
> > > application does? E.g. GNOME Settings, Nautilus, etc. which can
> > > handle the properties, and signals in a structured way.
> > >
> > > Thanks. Regards
> > >
> > > Gotam Gorabh
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 870 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnunet-developers/attachments/20240228/4bd86ab3/attachment.sig>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 10:22:32 +0530
From: Gotam Gorabh <gautamy672@gmail.com>
To: gnunet-developers@gnu.org
Subject: GSoC 2024: gnunet-gtk gtk4 upgrade
Message-ID:
<CAH7AZZyzBRskYaZWjqgSC84GaL2HUs-HgXajnVJr_Kp8xpeG_A@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank">CAH7AZZyzBRskYaZWjqgSC84GaL2HUs-HgXajnVJr_Kp8xpeG_A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hey,
I built and installed *gnunet* and *gnunet-gtk *successfully but while
testing the changes by compiling and running the binary file of gnunet-gtk
(e.g. Runing ./src/fs/gnunet-fs-gtk). It gives following error.
However, the Installed binary is running successfully.
WARNING `stat' failed on file
> `/home/firefly/gnunet-gtk/src/share/gnunet/config.d' at disk.c:836 with
> error: No such file or directory
> ERROR Failed to load
> `/home/firefly/gnunet-gtk/src/share/gnunet/gnunet_fs_gtk_main_window.glade':
> Failed to open file
> “/home/firefly/gnunet-gtk/src/share/gnunet/gnunet_fs_gtk_main_window.glade”:
> No such file or directory
>
Should I pass any further arguments to the command line while running
binary or something else?
Thanks & regards
Gotam Gorabh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnunet-developers/attachments/20240228/11a16260/attachment.htm>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
GNUnet-developers mailing list
GNUnet-developers@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
------------------------------
End of GNUnet-developers Digest, Vol 224, Issue 11
**************************************************
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |