X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <20151007160826.21277.qmail@stuge.se>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 18:08:26 +0200
From: "Peter Stuge (peter AT stuge DOT se) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To: gEDA users mailing list <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Toolkits
Mail-Followup-To: gEDA users mailing list <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
References: <3E72AC35-5862-41B9-A8FD-6804E89E9FFB AT sbcglobal DOT net> <20151003210144 DOT GA21262 AT localhost DOT localdomain> <56104E16 DOT 3050006 AT jump-ing DOT de> <20151003222928 DOT GC4287 AT localhost DOT localdomain> <CAM2RGhSuaNy3PQ7CJJjTbzTM6TckNGRShobchRj42Vk10ixPGQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510040356140 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv> <20151007134152 DOT 9597 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510071600380 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv> <20151007152048 DOT 17589 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> <CAM2RGhQK=BQWH1BP78dWAKZ=7L7-Ga3ZDDeam1ON72Q89=GAUg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAM2RGhQK=BQWH1BP78dWAKZ=7L7-Ga3ZDDeam1ON72Q89=GAUg@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> > There is at least one more way, in between the two: If at some point
> > gtk2 is no longer easily available but we still want to use it then
> > *we* can make it available. We can even go so far as bundle it into
> > our source tarballs. That's not ideal, but nothing ever is.
> 
> That bloats our stuff a lot because you will need all of GTK2
> including a lot of its dependencies.

I don't see that coming for a very long time but if it does then so be
it. That's the deal we enter into when we rely on a stack of external
dependencies, and I think that's perfectly fine.

We are as much a user of open source as we are a producer, and using
open source only works when we take responsibility for what we use.

This may mean that we become terribly slow at what we do, because we
also have to maintain much of the infrastructure we depend on, and I
find that perfectly acceptable, as long as there's a compelling
reason to wait.


> Keep in mind we want to package binaries for distros to use. So
> that is a lot of waisted space.

Reducing binary size is part of the "modern" value, but to be honest
I don't think it's a strong argument with today's storage cost.


> > I am quite sure that we would not be the only group of developers who
> > had this problem, and I think we would get lots of unexpected help if
> > we took responsibility for maintaining a legacy gtk2 package. :)
> 
> I think this is being smarter than other people.

I think it is simply taking responsibility for what we choose to consume.


> > I also don't think it would require much effort. Certainly less than
> > writing a new toolkit from scratch.
> 
> libgeda has it's own problems and changing them always starts a war.

Wars come from frustration because of different goals, mindsets and
expectations. I've fought too, although I didn't see it at the time.

I believed I was discussing, being constructive, but in the end
nobody was able to follow the discussion except the fighters and
all relevant facts were drowned by sheer email volume.


//Peter