search

mvz / gir_ffi-gtk

GirFFI-based bindings for Gtk+. Supports both Gtk+ 2 and Gtk+ 3
GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1
19 stars 7 forks source link

overrides for message-dialog, window, tree-view and tree-store with relatives #14

Closed patrickhno closed 10 years ago

patrickhno commented 10 years ago

With this I provide all overrides necessary to migrate all existing opine widgets to gir-ffi-gtk3. You may want to give me commit access to the repository as I expect to maintain much of the codebase while giving life to opine.

Enjoy, Patrick

patrickhno commented 10 years ago

Also, would you mind migrating to the MIT license?

patrickhno commented 10 years ago

Travis failures seem to be a apt dependency issue of some sort - same thing happens in Ubuntu. Does not happen on a brewed mac.

Ironicly runtime these features works as expected in Ubuntu (opine examples using all of these features run just fine).

Test setup seems to be broken somehow.

patrickhno commented 10 years ago

I've opened a new issue #15 on the build failure.

mvz commented 10 years ago

@patrickhno thanks for your pull request. I'll give you commit access. I generally work by using pull requests even when collaborating in a single repo, it gives everyone and Travis a chance to look at the code. I hope that's fine with you.

The test failure in #15 seems due to a difference in introspection data, caused by the fact that Travis uses a relatively old version of Ubuntu. There are 4 other failures that also occur on my machine. These probably have to do with the test setup, since Gtk complains about lacking columns (assertion 'n_columns > 0' failed).

Any particular reason for preferring MIT? Note that GirFFI is LGPL, as is the Gtk+ toolkit. Also, even under the LGPL, your own code is yours, so you're free to re-use what you write any way you like.

patrickhno commented 10 years ago

I also get a bunch of failures on a brand new Ubuntu (including #15). Yeah, and also the assertion bugs up there. Do I remember correctly there is a gobject-introspection package? Is this the source of all the magic defining methods and such? I don't really understand how the tests fail and the opine examples do not, really weird. I'd like to have a look at whats going on here, maybe some minor patches could resolve whatever is the cause. I hope we can avoid custom builds of newer libraries or whatever. And its kind of useful that travis fails with some older libraries if we can work around it on the Ruby side. I'll wrap my head around your excellent feedback and suck up new wisdom from it later on.

I like my code to improve everyones lives no matter how, hence the MIT. MIT allows use and re-use any way you want. LGPL does not, hence will improve world less. Plain and simple.

The LGPL is full of legal mumbo jumbo (another reason to avoid it) and demands, and its close to impossible not to be in conflict with it if ever to reuse any code including your own - not that anyone would ever care, but anyways. I'd prefer just-use-this-as-you-like-to-everyones-benefit over lawyer blablabla any time. I wouldn't even need a MIT, its just the brand-name-acronym people know for use-my-stuff-as-you-want. Any other license also restricts contributions from anyone on my page, and may just move heads into competing MIT software.