Re: Why this older version of pygtk?

[Philip Van Hoof <spamfrommailing freax org>]

On Sat, 2004-06-12 at 12:09 -0500, Jens Knutson wrote:

> Changing your tone to one that is less inflammatory and (especially)
> less accusatory would help your case quite a bit.  You know what they
> say about the trapping of insects with sweets instead of vinegar...

Perhaps true..

It's not my intention to be that inflammatory in my tone. It's just that
I 'am' stunned about multiple issues (see my previous post for a list).

[cut]

> 2.2.0 is the latest stable version, so that may answer your question
> about why Fedora uses such an "old" pygtk2.  (Also, it was only released
> in March - is that really so old?)
> 
> There have been many 2.3 releases since March, but as the odd minor
> version number indicates, this is still unstable.  While Fedora is
> cutting edge, it doesn't ship much beta software - certainly they
> shouldn't for something as critical as the bindings for the system-
> config-* tools.
> 
> All that said, it will be rather nice when PyGTK fully supports gtk 2.4.
> Not being able to assist with the effort, though, I'll not complain
> about it.

But then again, I am not complaining about PyGTK (well, not the current
development versions). But I am about the fact that Fedora is using an
incomplete Gtk+ binding for something as critical as the system-config-*
tools.

It's already causing pieces of code that is less maintainable. Since
developers are, at this moment, doing hacks to get simple things
working.


-- 
Philip Van Hoof, Software Developer @ Cronos
home: me at freax dot org
work: Philip dot VanHoof at cronos dot be
http://www.freax.be, http://www.freax.eu.org