On Sun, 2017-04-09 at 07:20 +0100, Daniel Boles wrote: > On 5 April 2017 at 15:00, Murray Cumming <murr...@murrayc.com> wrote: > > On Sat, 2017-04-01 at 09:22 +0200, Kjell Ahlstedt wrote: > > > I agree with Diether and Daniel: Let's do as gtk+ does, even > > though > > > they break the rules. > > > > OK. Then I don't object anymore. Thanks for being patient. Feel > > free to > > add API in the gtkmm-3-22 branch: > > https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtkmm/log/?h=gtkmm-3-22 > > Is the recently created glibmm-2-52 branch intended as an API- > breaking/adding (within limits of what the C lib does) wrapper of > GLib 2.50?
Glib 2.51/52 is meant to just target glib 2.51/52, with no API or ABI break. glibmm-2.54 is the ABI-breaking API, which will be used with gtkmm-4.0. It's not impossible that this will change again, I'm afraid. I'm not aware of any API/ABI breaks in glib. > Maybe then, based on this decision, that stuff should just be put in > glibmm-2-50 anyway? I don't think there is any issue about where to put glib/glibmm API. It's only unusual for GTK+/gtkmm. -- Murray Cumming murr...@murrayc.com www.murrayc.com _______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list gtkmm-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
