[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Ayttm-users] gtk2 port

From: Michael Gurski
Subject: Re: [Ayttm-users] gtk2 port
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 01:03:32 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 04:39:19PM +0100, Colin Leroy wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 15:45:49 +0100 Nicolas Peninguy
> > Yes, I think doing it in a clean way would require lots of work.
> I'm still wondering _why_ gtk people didn't provide an simple way for such
> things. Ok, gtk1 API is not as good as Gtk2's, but a compatibility API
> would have been welcomed.

Time to pipe up and throw another possibility out there, which I
realize is likely not gtk2 compatible, but would ease
cross-platform...  wxWindows, anyone?  (I've since discovered that,
yes, mingw32 does indeed work for compiling w32 binaries on linux...)

> > It seems they are reinventing GConf (Gnome 2 preferences system) with
> > their "EB registry".
> Which is anyway the stupidest thing I ever saw. Who wants a registry
> instead of plaintext files ? 

This was the biggest thing that bugged me reading about eb-lite...  I
*like* plain text files.  They're easy to read, easy to understand,
easy to edit...

> > What about a XUL interface ? :-))
> Nooo, everything but that :-)))

I see an anonymous suggestion to an EB list coming on. :-)

Michael A. Gurski             (opt. [firstname].)address@hidden
Hail Eris! -><- All Hail Discordia!  O-  http://www.pobox.com/~[lastname]
1024/39B5BADD  PGP: 3493 A994 B159 48B7 1757 1E4E 6256 4570
1024D/1166213E GPG: 628F 37A4 62AF 1475 45DB  AD81 ADC9 E606 1166 213E
My opinions are mine alone, even if you should be sharing them.

"Once governments are given the authority to restrict the liberty of
some sane adults for what it considers their physical or moral
welfare, there is no principled stopping point in terms of what
governments will have the authority to prohibit. The consequence will
be that virtually anything which anyone holds of most value may become
prohibited to them on grounds of its being judged immoral or dangerous
to them. There are practically no forms of activity in which sane
adults like to engage that others are not able to find reasons to
condemn as morally or physically bad for those who engage in
them. This ranges from drinking alcohol and smoking tobacco, to eating
certain types of food, to not taking exercise, to taking too much,
engaging in dangerous sports, practising certain religions, not
practising any religion, reading books on science, etc. Unless
government draws the line at only prohibiting conduct that harms
others against their will, no member of society can be secure in being
able to do or have anything they most want and value."  --David Conway

Attachment: pgpbMRL0vBE_q.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]