Spec URL: http://gnome2-globalmenu.googlecode.com/files/gtk2-aqd-svn221.spec SRPM URL: http://gnome2-globalmenu.googlecode.com/files/gtk2-aqd-0.3.221.2.12.3-3.fc8.src.rpm Description: patched gtk2 version to allow global menu for gnome applications Project host: http://code.google.com/p/gnome2-globalmenu/ Related package: gnome2-globalmenu-applet
This is my first package.
Don't you need a sponsor ?
Yes, I need.
Umm.. gtk2 maintainers, would you watch this?
I don't think we'll ship any patched gtk versions in parallel to gtk2.
(In reply to comment #5) > I don't think we'll ship any patched gtk versions in parallel to gtk2. Well, I don't think either so I cc-ed to gtk2 maintainers. Feng, how do you think? IMO if you want to add some functions to GTK you should ask GTK upstream directly to import your patch sets.
Yes, you're right shipping two gtk in one distribution tends to confuse users. i thought the benefit is if we can install gtk2 by default, and if we leave gtk2-aqd in package list, then when people want mac-like menubar they can choose to install gtk2-aqd. anyway, thank you still.
Personally, I'm a fan of the Mac-workaline global menu bar. However, I would also dislike shipping two different GTK+ versions with that as the only change since it would effectively double (or more) the work required to keep them updated and in sync with one another. My thinking is similar to that of the Freeworld FreeType build included in Livna/RPMfusion (http://bugzilla.livna.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1473). Could we add an ld.so config for the patched GTK+, then have it in its own %_libdir subdirectory or similar? Alternatively, and mostly for the sake of my own curiosity: GTK+ maintainers, would it possible to add this patch to the mainline gtk2 spec file, so we could easily rebuild it "--with global_menu" or similar (though it would be disabled by default)?
> [...] of the Mac-workaline global menu bar. [...] That should be "workalike." Sorry for the typo.
> My thinking is similar to that of the Freeworld FreeType build included in > Livna/RPMfusion (http://bugzilla.livna.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1473). Could we add > an ld.so config for the patched GTK+, then have it in its own %_libdir > subdirectory or similar? All kinds of odd hacks are possible, and I am not looking forward to the bugs that result from any such scenario. > Alternatively, and mostly for the sake of my own curiosity: GTK+ maintainers, > would it possible to add this patch to the mainline gtk2 spec file, so we > could > easily rebuild it "--with global_menu" or similar (though it would be > disabled by default)? I don't see any benefit of that, honestly. People who absolutely cannot live without this can just patch the srpm and rebuild. The difference between "add config option to spec file, rebuild" and "add patch to spec file, rebuild" is really marginal. For any further discussion of global menubar patches, please refer to the upstream bug on this patch.
Well, should we once close this bug (as WONTFIX)?
I think so.