su, 2008-09-07 kello 19:29 +0100, Ian Jackson kirjoitti:
> I would say that _at the time when these projects were first shipped_
> in this state, it _was_ a clear violation (both of our principles and
> of the GPL) to do so.
As far as I understand, when most of those projects first shipped, the C
correct:
Manterola writes ("Re: 25+2 packages with (Glade) generated C source files
without the source"):
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Sami Liedes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [ stuff ]
>
> No. .c files are still source code.
This is not correct. `Source c
2008-08-31 (일), 14:56 +0100, Neil Williams:
> On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 15:27 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le dimanche 31 août 2008 à 14:13 +0100, Neil Williams a écrit :
> > > Sorry, that is just tosh. If you want to load the glade file via Glade,
> > > you keep the XML, depend on libglade and c
Le dimanche 31 août 2008 à 14:13 +0100, Neil Williams a écrit :
> Sorry, that is just tosh. If you want to load the glade file via Glade,
> you keep the XML, depend on libglade and call libglade at runtime.
You don’t need libglade anymore, GTK+ has integrated the functionality
since 2.12.
--
.'
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 02:13:21PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> Of course it does! Once the functionality is dropped, there is no way to
> continue working on the project without editing the C files. Developers
> cannot continue using the old version of glade (it doesn't support some
> of the stuf
On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 15:27 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le dimanche 31 août 2008 à 14:13 +0100, Neil Williams a écrit :
> > Sorry, that is just tosh. If you want to load the glade file via Glade,
> > you keep the XML, depend on libglade and call libglade at runtime.
>
> You don’t need libglad
On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 15:08 +0300, Sami Liedes wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 09:12:34AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > I’m pretty sure many of the list are in similar cases. Now loading the
> > UI directly into the application is the standard, but not so long ago
> > people generated templat
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 09:12:34AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> I’m pretty sure many of the list are in similar cases. Now loading the
> UI directly into the application is the standard, but not so long ago
> people generated template code with glade and then edited it by hand.
> The .glade fil
On Sat, 2008-08-30 at 23:19 -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Sami Liedes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The only questionable case I found
> > by this sampling is dia, where the file is "generated by Glade and
> > then hand-coded to make GNOME optional and add t
Le dimanche 31 août 2008 à 04:17 +0300, Sami Liedes a écrit :
> I went through some of these and checked them by hand, and generally
> couldn't find the glade project anywhere in the source tarball (it
> might be in the diff, I didn't check for that - would that BTW be OK,
> to have source code in
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 10:17 PM, Sami Liedes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I grepped the source tarballs in Lenny (testing) main section for the
> note "DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE - it is generated by Glade." which
> indicates the file is generated using the Glade UI editor. Then I
> checked if these p
11 matches
Mail list logo
