Re: MBF: Removal of GTK2 from forky
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <[email protected]> Fri, 9 Jan 2026 11:14:07 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.debian.devel.gtk-gnome,gmane.linux.debian.devel.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi, On 09/01/2026 10:13, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > Hi Jeremy, > > On Thu Jan 8, 2026 at 8:38 PM GMT, Jeremy Bícha wrote: >> GTK 2 has been unmaintained upstream since the end of 2020 when GTK 4 >> was released. There isn't anyone to maintain GTK 2. The Debian GNOME >> team is trying to remove GTK 2 from Debian, not orphan it. > > Thanks for clarifying your intent! > > As volunteers, we should only work on what we want to, so the GNOME team > should absolutely not be compelled to maintain GTK2 if you no longer > want to. > > I respect your opinion that Debian would be better off without GTK2 in > the archive. However, I don't agree with it. The two pillars of my > position are: removing this forces the removal of useful dependent > programs in the archive which have active users; it also makes it more > difficult for users to run dependent programs *outside* the archive, > including software of historical significance. IMHO this fall foul of SC > §4. (with my Release Team hat on) If GTK+2 is dead upstream for so long, then it'd be a disservice to our users to keep shipping it in new releases. If you find any of the remaining rdeps useful, there's time to port those over to GTK+3 or GTK+4. As for running external software, as you say, that is external, so GTK+2 can be shipped externally as well if needed. We don't ship every old library just because someone could make use of it. There is a maintenance cost to that. See e.g. QT4, libsdl1.2 and so many others that could been have kept for similar reasons. Perhaps those old packages also need us to ship GCC 5 or an old cmake. That's a slippery slope. Note that GTK+3 was released in 2011. Cheers, Emilio