What do I want?

It's been asked, and fair enough.

In a nutshell, my ideal galeon2, from a ui perspective, is galeon1 using
gtk2/gnome2 libs. If it coincides with the HIG, it's a fluke; it does
everything galeon1 does, and it lets me do everything galeon1 let me do.
Of course, the current galeon2 backend architecture is great, and I
applaude marco for making it so. (With the caveat that I think the gtk
object system is something no one should be exposed to for any
significant length of time :-)

Uncompromising and extreme? Sure, marco has his vision and so do I. Is
there a middle ground? Frankly I don't think so. Galeon2 started off as
a sort of middle ground and neither of us was happy with it. Marco's
gotten his way since then, and I'm certainly no happier.

We talked about a slight refactoring of the backend to allow for thin
ui development to follow to two independent tracks. Right now I think
this is the best way to do. It requires minimal (if any) compromises in
vision on either side and allows the solid backend to stay in place and
recieve the full attention it should from what few developers we have.

If it sounds like a glorified 'advanced' mode, it probably is. So what?
Either two thin binaries sharing a .so backend or a command line switch.
We got agreement that either would be an acceptable way to go on sunday.
Well, now push has come to shove, so let's do it. The only other
alternative is a fork and that will render galeon2 completely
irrelevant, though I have serious doubts about it's relevance at the
moment.

--phil



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by: viaVerio will pay you up to
$1,000 for every account that you consolidate with us.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;4749864;7604308;v?
http://www.viaverio.com/consolidator/osdn.cfm