Ethereal-dev: [Ethereal-dev] RE: [Ethereal-cvs] Rev 11936: /trunk/doc/: README.developer

Note: This archive is from the project's previous web site, ethereal.com. This list is no longer active.

From: "Peter Kjellerstedt" <peter.kjellerstedt@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 08:11:40 +0200
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ethereal-cvs-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:ethereal-cvs-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 02:00
> To: ethereal-cvs@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [Ethereal-cvs] Rev 11936: /trunk/doc/: README.developer
> 
> User: guy
> Date: 2004/09/07 06:59 PM
> 
> Log:
>  Note that developers should avoid GTK+ 2.x/GLib 2.x-only stuff (and,
in
>  particularly, should disregard all the renaming they did of some
>  routines, as the old names work Just Fine in 2.x but the new names
don't
>  work in 1.2[.x]).
> 
> Directory: /trunk/doc/
>   Changes    Path                Action
>   +14 -0     README.developer    Modified
> 
> http://anonsvn.ethereal.com/viewcvs/viewcvs.py?rev=11936&view=rev

I have no idea how GTK+ work, and what actual changes they 
have made, but would it not be better to switch to using the 
new names rather than stay with the old ones?  Otherwise, 
what happens when they eventually decide to remove them in 
GTK3 or so?

If it is as easy as them simply having renamed a number of 
functions, this should easily be handled by a compatibility 
layer (aka a bunch of defines) for those still using GTK 1.x.

//Peter