On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 02:00:35PM +0100, Ingo Brückl wrote:
>
> J.M. Maurer wrote on Tue, 15 Nov 2011 00:10:52 +0100:
>
> > [...] (GTK+2 is still supported)
>
> Actually, not really. I'm going to apply patches to fix this. (Uselessly
> wasted time to make something work that was already working just fine.)
>
> I'm still worried about the copies of the gtk2 code though - most of which
> probably unnecessary. That wasn't a smart thing to do.
>
> Ingo
Please, support GTK+2 at least as long as GTK+3 suffers from
a significant performance loss. See:
http://lists-archives.org/gtk/12889-is-gtk-3-x-2x-slower-than-gtk-2-x.html
Thanks!
-- Petr Tomasek <http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~tomasek> Jabber: butrus@jabbim.cz ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ EA 355:001 DU DU DU DU EA 355:002 TU TU TU TU EA 355:003 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU EA 355:004 NA NA NA NA NA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Received on Fri Nov 18 09:25:48 2011
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Nov 18 2011 - 09:25:48 CET