On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 12:33:13PM +0100, Alex Valavanis wrote:
I just wanted to follow up a couple of recent discussions on our build
1. There was some talk of moving to C++17. Tav - I think you were going
ahead with a dependency bump in master? Are we still doing this, or did we
find any issues?
We’ve already done that in !1755 (see
e6bb9d231f0f1324baa73e5a73f35509f7bad332 on master), we can now use
C++17 everywhere on master, as well as in 2geom (for instance !28
replaces most boost:optional with std::optional).
I’m not aware of any issue coming from there, I’ve done all of my recent
GSoC development on top of master and things seem to work.
There is of course a lot of improvements we can now do to the codebase,
I tried to list the relevant ones on the wiki but I haven’t started
2. Are we OK to bump to Gtk+ 3.24? AFAIK this is the final Gtk+ 3 version
so would be a good stable target for Inkscape 1.1. The only issue would be
RHEL/CentOS/Debian LTS are stuck on an older version. My feeling about
this kind of thing is that we keep Inkscape 1.0.* as our LTS and push ahead
with a dependency bump in master.
I agree with that plan. What are the wanted features this would unlock?
Inkscape Devel mailing list -- inkscape-devel(a)lists.inkscape.org
To unsubscribe send an email to inkscape-devel-leave(a)lists.inkscape.org
Emmanuel Gil Peyrot