Re-namespacing Pidgin's API for Introspection

Mark Doliner mark at
Sat Feb 8 13:34:35 EST 2014

On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Ankit Vani <a at> wrote:
> The way introspection expects it is that everything from libpurple goes
> into the Purple namespace, everything from libgnt into Gnt, pidgin into
> Pidgin and finch into Finch (which I also personally believe is the right
> way), without defining things in the Gtk or Glib namespaces. This would
> allow, for instance, a python plugin to do
> 'from gi.repository import Pidgin' and use Pidgin.Whatever stuff.
> The distinction you are suggesting can be handled by something like
> PidginGtkWebView instead of GtkWebView, if really needed. Still,
> PidginWebView still sounds cleaner. The generated gtk-doc docs will show a
> type heirarchy for GObjects, widgets etc.
> Moreover, I don't think it makes sense that things being gtk widgets
> should belong to the gtk namespace regardless of them not being a part of
> gtk. It sounds like renaming PurpleAccount into GAccount or something
> after making it a GObject is necessary (stupid comparision, I know).

I agree with all of the above points. We shouldn't name things in the
Gtk namespace. It's not our namespace to muck with and it would cause
problems if they ever added a GtkWebView (even if if they took ours).
Maybe years ago we hoped upstream gtk might want our widgets. I think
that's unlikely to happen now.

For our widgets in the pidgin subdirectory I'm in favor of renaming
them to "PidginWhatever" (not "PidginGtkWhatever").

I think we should probably rename everything to be in our namespace.
Do you have a list handy? I'm wondering what stuff in libpurple needs
to be renamed.

More information about the Devel mailing list