Hi Alexandre,

Thanks for your answer :-) . Of course I'm interested in the nice things of gtk3, but for a starter I would like to know how complicated is to get today's Inkscape in gtk3, without any new new candies. For example, how much of Inkscape code is still dependent in the old gdk drawing infra-structure? Would the port be mostly a compile time issue or there would be significant coding to do? I should probably make some time to give it a try, but I would like to heard any advice.

Regards.

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:07 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine <alexandre.prokoudine@...400...> wrote:

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Alcides Viamontes Esquivel wrote:

...

I found this thread: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=27264203 about migration of inkscape to gtk3. Has anybody worked on this?

Nope

...

I've using Inkscape for a long time, but I have zero experience with it's inner workings (beyond coding basic extensions in python ;-) ), so, my question is, how complicated would it be?

It depends :)

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

---

RSA(R) Conference 2012 Save $700 by Nov 18 Register now http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1 _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 5:47 PM, john Culleton wrote:

I would vote against anything that would require additional libraries over and above what I have now. Installing Inkscape on my brand of linux, Slackware, is a real bear because of library x which demands library y which uses a download and compile system different from the usual ones --- well you know the drill.

Mmm... no, I don't know the drill. I just use 'sudo apt-get build-dep PACKAGE' on Ubuntu to install all dependencies required to build PACKAGE from source code. And even so it's just because I'm a retarded translator who is used to building stuff himself. Other people just use the PPA.

In my not so humble opinion people who choose source based distributions automatically enable the "Yes, I hereby confirm readiness to have occasional sex with software dependencies" checkbox. It's part of the game. Or, to put it in a milder wording, "If you don't want the monster, you don't pull the lever" (C) Terry Pratchett

The move to GTK+3 is inevitable, but it isn't likely to happen for 0.49 which won't be released until sometime in 2012. Besides, GTK+3 is likely to improve things for us performance-wise. I can't see people complaining about that :)

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

http://developer.gnome.org/gtk3/3.0/gtk-migrating-2-to-3.html

Doesn't look like too hideous a task...

Sent from my iPad

On 8 Nov 2011, at 18:40, Josh Andler <scislac@...400...> wrote:

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:00 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine <alexandre.prokoudine@...400...> wrote:

...

The move to GTK+3 is inevitable, but it isn't likely to happen for 0.49 which won't be released until sometime in 2012. Besides, GTK+3 is likely to improve things for us performance-wise. I can't see people complaining about that :)

I'm somewhat questioning if we should explore the idea of a branch for people to work on GTK3 migration. We have a "stable" branch for 0.48 that we backport changes to. I question if we could handle maintaining it since we would need to keep it in sync with trunk. Thoughts anyone?

Cheers, Josh

---

RSA(R) Conference 2012 Save $700 by Nov 18 Register now http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1 _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

Hi All,

I'd say it's reasonably accurate but incomplete. Unfortunately, I'm not really familiar enough with GTK development to work heavily on this myself, but I'm certainly happy to get involved with any of the donkey-work that will be needed.

The main thing we need to do at this stage is make sure that we're not using any deprecated symbols, as described at http://developer.gnome.org/gtk3/stable/gtk-migrating-2-to-3.html#id1391340

* I believe Krzysztof was working on a complete rewrite of the SPCanvasItem hierarchy, which would remove use of GtkObject. I haven't been paying close attention to this... does anyone have any ideas?

* The switch to external GDL looks like it will happen post GTK3, but it should be easy to merge the upstream changes when we switch. After that, we can push our changes upstream and get rid of our branch.

* Last time I checked, a few things needed to be migrated to the GtkTreeView API.

Cheers,

AV

On 8 November 2011 21:22, Josh Andler <scislac@...400...> wrote:

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 1:11 PM, John Cliff <john.cliff@...400...> wrote:

...

http://developer.gnome.org/gtk3/3.0/gtk-migrating-2-to-3.html

Doesn't look like too hideous a task...

Here is a wiki page that Alex Valavanis set up months ago to help point out some of the tasks at hand. Alex, is this page still accurate or is it out of date?

http://wiki.inkscape.org/wiki/index.php/GTK%2B_3_migration

Cheers, Josh

On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 18:00:04 +0400 Alexandre Prokoudine <alexandre.prokoudine@...400...> wrote:

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 5:47 PM, john Culleton wrote:

...

I would vote against anything that would require additional libraries over and above what I have now. Installing Inkscape on my brand of linux, Slackware, is a real bear because of library x which demands library y which uses a download and compile system different from the usual ones --- well you know the drill.

Mmm... no, I don't know the drill. I just use 'sudo apt-get build-dep PACKAGE' on Ubuntu to install all dependencies required to build PACKAGE from source code. And even so it's just because I'm a retarded translator who is used to building stuff himself. Other people just use the PPA.

In my not so humble opinion people who choose source based distributions automatically enable the "Yes, I hereby confirm readiness to have occasional sex with software dependencies" checkbox. It's part of the game. Or, to put it in a milder wording, "If you don't want the monster, you don't pull the lever" (C) Terry Pratchett

The move to GTK+3 is inevitable, but it isn't likely to happen for 0.49 which won't be released until sometime in 2012. Besides, GTK+3 is likely to improve things for us performance-wise. I can't see people complaining about that :)

Alexandre Prokoudine http://libregraphicsworld.org

So I have a respite until sometime in 2012. Good. I just want to do my work with a reasonably current set of tools. The less work I have to do to keep current the better I like it.

Different apps offer different challenges. For those of us who use Slackware or a Slackware derivative, Inkscape offers real challenges because of the many non-Slackware libraries required. There is a list of about six, and those have to be installed in a certain order. And you have to watch the versions. Sometimes package x requires library version a but package y requires library version b.

Fortunately the Slackware spin-off Salix offers a packaging system called slapt-get, and that in turn contains Inkscape 48.2, which is current or almost current. So I don't compile Inkscape from source but use a package manager.

But repositories, like distributions, don't always offer all the required packages or the current versions. If there is a major change of the libraries required for Inkscape Salix may not keep up. So I worry.

Scribus offers a different set of opportunities and problems. Salix repository doesn't contain Scribus at all. So compile from source is my only option. Fortunately it is relatively easy.

There are other apps that are available in source form only. I use whatever form is available and easiest.