GNOME 3 cleanup status update

This is another (shortened) update about cleaning up the GNOME stack for GNOME 3. This has also been posted to the desktop-devel mailing list.

This status report refers to the aims listed in the 2.27/2.29 schedule and the automatic statistics available.

PROBLEMS

STATUS OF TASKS

Clear a11y plan and schedule for 3.0

Willie just updated the wiki page.

Less than 9 modules depending on libgnome

NOT COMPLETED (Progress compared to 2.27.3: 15->9).

  • low: 7 ((gnome-python-desktop), yelp, gconf, (glade3), gconf-dbus, (gnome-python), (gnome-sharp))
  • average: 2 (Evolution, gok)
  • complex: 0
  • PATCHES awaiting review by maintainers: yelp

Less than 9 modules depending on libgnomeui

NOT COMPLETED (Progress compared to 2.27.3: 12->10).

  • low: 7 (gnome-control-center, evolution-exchange, (gnome-python-desktop), libgail-gnome which is required by Orca, yelp, (glade3), (gnome-python))
  • average: 2 (gnome-panel, gok)
  • complex: 1 (Evolution)

Less than 20 modules depending on libglade

COMPLETED (Progress compared to 2.27.3: 32->19).

  • low: 12
  • average: 5 (gnome-control-center, dasher, gnome-media, gnome-panel, gok)
  • complex: 1 (Evolution)
  • PATCHES awaiting review by maintainers: gnome-media, gnome-panel, sound-juicer

Less than 5 modules with non-low Gtk-Deprecated-Symbols

NOT COMPLETED (Progress compared to 2.27.3: 9->6).

  • low: 6
  • average: 5 (Evolution, gedit, metacity, gconf-dbus, (pygtk))
  • complex: 1 (gnome-games)
  • PATCHES awaiting review by maintainers: metacity

Less than 15 modules total with Gtk-Deprecated-Symbols

COMPLETED (Progress compared to 2.27.3: 17->12).
See above.

HOW TO HELP

For example you should help kill libgnome(ui) by providing a patch. It’s quite often only a few lines.
If you’ve already patched a module to get rid of stuff like gnome-ui-init, gnome-icon-entry, gnome-app, gnome-program, gnome-client, gnome-macros or gnome-druid see the wiki for a list of other apps still using these.

6 Responses to “GNOME 3 cleanup status update”

  1. Simon says:

    I note that you count bindings like gnome-sharp or gnome-python-desktop against your lists of packages using libgnome and other deprecated APIs. Isn’t this unrealistic? They’re bindings – they can’t drop their dependency on a deprecated API, any more than Gnome could simply drop that API instead of deprecating it…

  2. aklapper says:

    @Simon: I list bindings as they currently do not tell a developer who uses these bindings that the functionality he uses is deprecated. Bindings can drop their dependency on a deprecated API, e.g. by moving all the deprecated stuff to a separate -deprecated package, or by requiring a compile flag like “-enable-deprecated-stuff” or something like that. It’s unclear what is the best way to do this.

  3. Simon says:

    @Andre – seems to me that a binding should reflect what it’s binding to. So if libgnomeui is deprecated, any direct binding to it should also be marked deprecated, but I don’t think it’s reasonable for the bindings to simply drop support for an official Gnome API, even if Gnome now discourage it’s use. Until those libraries are officially gone from Gnome, I don’t see a case for breaking compatibility by dropping support for them in other languages.

  4. Simon says:

    Incidentally, have you considered putting a captcha or other anti-spam solution on your blog? I can’t help but notice a lot of unwanted noise…

  5. aklapper says:

    @Simon: Don’t know if blogs.gnome.org offers captchas.
    Blocked the IPs instead.

  6. Willibald Berger says:

    Das sind alles ausgezeichnete Ansätze, die hier gepostet werden.