Re: [sane-devel] Happy new year- time for a sane-backends release!

[m. allan noah]

Sounds reasonable, though at the moment I am pretty frustrated with how
this backends release went. I know folks worked pretty hard on what we have
now (particularly Olaf), but I think I am going to make an executive
decision, and rip some of this out. Once I have done this (and cleaned up
the snapshot build process), I'd like to quickly release 1.2.2. Hopefully,
we can end up with a release that actually builds with a proper version
number, and without autotools being required.

allan


On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 8:18 PM Ralph Little  wrote:

> Hi,
> On a slightly different note, perhaps we should consider doing a frontends
> release soon.
> Thierry has been working on a GTK3 port of the GUI apps in there which is
> going to become an issue shortly as some distros drop GTK2.
>
> Cheers,
> Ralph
>
> On 2023-02-07 04:48, m. allan noah wrote:
>
> This entire thing is a little crazy, because I spent more time fighting
> with the automation than I would have spent doing an old manual release.
> One of the steps there was simply to edit configure.ac and change the
> version number a couple of times. Seems easy enough to 'echo $new_version >
> .version' or something like that in this new scheme. I'll do some more
> research into how other projects handle this.
>
> And, I noticed the extra comments at the top of the NEWS file were being
> displayed in the release notes and manually removed that in the gitlab UI.
>
> allan
>
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 12:32 AM Ralph Little  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2023-02-06 20:04, m. allan noah wrote:
>>
>> Hmm, looks like AC_INIT calls `./tools/git-version-gen --prefix ''
>> .tarball-version`, which returns UNKNOWN. Seems like our release process
>> might be leaving out some steps. I guess I'll dig more tomorrow.
>>
>>
>> IIRC, this has been a long-standing issue with the tar file included in
>> the GitLab release artifacts, in that they don't build. You have to instead
>> get the snapshot file.
>> I don't know how long it has been like that but we do get a complaint
>> every now again. I keep trying to remember to figure out what is going on
>> to do something about it.
>>
>> If it is the thing that I am thinking about, it might also be the thing
>> that always stuffs me up in the release PPA because the orig tar file
>> requires an extra .gitversion file with the release version in it,
>> otherwise it won't build when it is uploaded.
>>
>> We really need to get our collective heads together and fix it. I don't
>> pretend to really understand what the issue is though. Build systems aren't
>> really my thing.
>>
>> 
>> As an aside, the release page seems to have some weird guff from the top
>> of the NEWS file in there. Not really sure what caused that. It is some of
>> the comment material. :`(
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ralph
>>
>> allan
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 10:44 PM m. allan noah  wrote:
>>
>>> So, I was able to do the release on time (after filling in a few blanks
>>> in our documentation). But I only did the website updates tonight. I seem
>>> to have run into a small problem there- when I download the release
>>> tarball, and run ./autogen.sh, i get a ./configure file which has 'UNKNOWN'
>>> as the package version number. This also happens with 1.1.1 as well. Is
>>> this happening for anyone else?
>>>
>>> allan
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 10:05 PM Ralph Little  wrote:
>>>
 Hi,
 OK, I think I have done that.

 Because we are short on time I cut and pasted the release note
 fragments from my spreadsheet into the NEWS file with Apostrophe MD file
 editor and whipped them into shape manually.
 First time using it and it is pretty good. Obviously, this was a manual
 process, but it wasn't too onerous.

 I couldn't get the towncrier thingy to work anyway. I don't really have
 much experience with python and pip. Python seems an awful lot more
 complicated since the last time I used it :(

 I have pushed the release notes in NEWS to your branch.

 Cheers,
 Ralph

 On 2023-02-04 18:18, m. allan noah wrote:

 Awesome, thanks! I'm working on updating doc/releases.md, which I find
 to be hard to use. Maybe if you keep some notes on what you did, I can
 incorporate your method instead of towncrier.

 allan

 On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 9:12 PM Ralph Little  wrote:

> Hi,
> In this case I didn't generate the towncrier files. It's a lot of faff
> if you don't do it as you go along.
> I just put them into a spreadsheet.
>
> I will try to generate the release notes from that.
>
> Cheers,
> Ralph
>
> On 2023-02-04 17:57, m. allan noah wrote:
>
> I have pushed a branch called 'release-1.2.x'. I don't have this
> 'towncrier' thing, so maybe you can run that and merge the release notes?
>
> allan
>
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 11:39 AM m. allan noah 
> wrote:
>
>> Awesome, thanks! I'll probably take a first s

Re: [sane-devel] Happy new year- time for a sane-backends release!

[Ralph Little]

Hi,
On a slightly different note, perhaps we should consider doing a 
frontends release soon.
Thierry has been working on a GTK3 port of the GUI apps in there which 
is going to become an issue shortly as some distros drop GTK2.


Cheers,
Ralph

On 2023-02-07 04:48, m. allan noah wrote:
This entire thing is a little crazy, because I spent more time 
fighting with the automation than I would have spent doing an old 
manual release. One of the steps there was simply to edit configure.ac 
 and change the version number a couple of times. 
Seems easy enough to 'echo $new_version > .version' or something like 
that in this new scheme. I'll do some more research into how other 
projects handle this.


And, I noticed the extra comments at the top of the NEWS file were 
being displayed in the release notes and manually removed that in the 
gitlab UI.


allan

On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 12:32 AM Ralph Little  wrote:

Hi,

On 2023-02-06 20:04, m. allan noah wrote:

Hmm, looks like AC_INIT calls `./tools/git-version-gen --prefix
'' .tarball-version`, which returns UNKNOWN. Seems like our
release process might be leaving out some steps. I guess I'll dig
more tomorrow.



IIRC, this has been a long-standing issue with the tar file
included in the GitLab release artifacts, in that they don't
build. You have to instead get the snapshot file.
I don't know how long it has been like that but we do get a
complaint every now again. I keep trying to remember to figure out
what is going on to do something about it.

If it is the thing that I am thinking about, it might also be the
thing that always stuffs me up in the release PPA because the orig
tar file requires an extra .gitversion file with the release
version in it, otherwise it won't build when it is uploaded.

We really need to get our collective heads together and fix it. I
don't pretend to really understand what the issue is though. Build
systems aren't really my thing.


As an aside, the release page seems to have some weird guff from
the top of the NEWS file in there. Not really sure what caused
that. It is some of the comment material. :`(

Cheers,
Ralph


allan

On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 10:44 PM m. allan noah
 wrote:

So, I was able to do the release on time (after filling in a
few blanks in our documentation). But I only did the website
updates tonight. I seem to have run into a small problem
there- when I download the release tarball, and run
./autogen.sh, i get a ./configure file which has 'UNKNOWN' as
the package version number. This also happens with 1.1.1 as
well. Is this happening for anyone else?

allan

On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 10:05 PM Ralph Little
 wrote:

Hi,
OK, I think I have done that.

Because we are short on time I cut and pasted the release
note fragments from my spreadsheet into the NEWS file
with Apostrophe MD file editor and whipped them into
shape manually.
First time using it and it is pretty good. Obviously,
this was a manual process, but it wasn't too onerous.

I couldn't get the towncrier thingy to work anyway. I
don't really have much experience with python and pip.
Python seems an awful lot more complicated since the last
time I used it :(

I have pushed the release notes in NEWS to your branch.

Cheers,
Ralph

On 2023-02-04 18:18, m. allan noah wrote:

Awesome, thanks! I'm working on updating
doc/releases.md, which I find to be hard to use. Maybe
if you keep some notes on what you did, I can
incorporate your method instead of towncrier.

allan

On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 9:12 PM Ralph Little
 wrote:

Hi,
In this case I didn't generate the towncrier files.
It's a lot of faff if you don't do it as you go along.
I just put them into a spreadsheet.

I will try to generate the release notes from that.

Cheers,
Ralph

On 2023-02-04 17:57, m. allan noah wrote:

I have pushed a branch called 'release-1.2.x'. I
don't have this 'towncrier' thing, so maybe you can
run that and merge the release notes?

allan

On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 11:39 AM m. allan noah
 wrote:

Awesome, thanks! I'll probably take a first
stab at it on the 4th, and see if I can follow
our current instructions.

allan

On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 8:43 PM Ralph Little
 wrote:

Re: [sane-devel] Happy new year- time for a sane-backends release!

[Ludwig Jaffe]

"This entire thing is a little crazy, because I spent more time fighting with 
the automation than I would have spent doing an old manual release."

Lemma:
Things take longer and become buggy if you try to automate them.
 :-)

Thank you for your contributions!

Cheers

luja


On February 7, 2023 1:48:43 PM GMT+01:00, "m. allan noah"  
wrote:
>This entire thing is a little crazy, because I spent more time fighting
>with the automation than I would have spent doing an old manual release.
>One of the steps there was simply to edit configure.ac and change the
>version number a couple of times. Seems easy enough to 'echo $new_version >
>.version' or something like that in this new scheme. I'll do some more
>research into how other projects handle this.
>
>And, I noticed the extra comments at the top of the NEWS file were being
>displayed in the release notes and manually removed that in the gitlab UI.
>
>allan
>
>On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 12:32 AM Ralph Little  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2023-02-06 20:04, m. allan noah wrote:
>>
>> Hmm, looks like AC_INIT calls `./tools/git-version-gen --prefix ''
>> .tarball-version`, which returns UNKNOWN. Seems like our release process
>> might be leaving out some steps. I guess I'll dig more tomorrow.
>>
>>
>> IIRC, this has been a long-standing issue with the tar file included in
>> the GitLab release artifacts, in that they don't build. You have to instead
>> get the snapshot file.
>> I don't know how long it has been like that but we do get a complaint
>> every now again. I keep trying to remember to figure out what is going on
>> to do something about it.
>>
>> If it is the thing that I am thinking about, it might also be the thing
>> that always stuffs me up in the release PPA because the orig tar file
>> requires an extra .gitversion file with the release version in it,
>> otherwise it won't build when it is uploaded.
>>
>> We really need to get our collective heads together and fix it. I don't
>> pretend to really understand what the issue is though. Build systems aren't
>> really my thing.
>>
>> 
>> As an aside, the release page seems to have some weird guff from the top
>> of the NEWS file in there. Not really sure what caused that. It is some of
>> the comment material. :`(
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ralph
>>
>> allan
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 10:44 PM m. allan noah  wrote:
>>
>>> So, I was able to do the release on time (after filling in a few blanks
>>> in our documentation). But I only did the website updates tonight. I seem
>>> to have run into a small problem there- when I download the release
>>> tarball, and run ./autogen.sh, i get a ./configure file which has 'UNKNOWN'
>>> as the package version number. This also happens with 1.1.1 as well. Is
>>> this happening for anyone else?
>>>
>>> allan
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 10:05 PM Ralph Little  wrote:
>>>
 Hi,
 OK, I think I have done that.

 Because we are short on time I cut and pasted the release note fragments
 from my spreadsheet into the NEWS file with Apostrophe MD file editor and
 whipped them into shape manually.
 First time using it and it is pretty good. Obviously, this was a manual
 process, but it wasn't too onerous.

 I couldn't get the towncrier thingy to work anyway. I don't really have
 much experience with python and pip. Python seems an awful lot more
 complicated since the last time I used it :(

 I have pushed the release notes in NEWS to your branch.

 Cheers,
 Ralph

 On 2023-02-04 18:18, m. allan noah wrote:

 Awesome, thanks! I'm working on updating doc/releases.md, which I find
 to be hard to use. Maybe if you keep some notes on what you did, I can
 incorporate your method instead of towncrier.

 allan

 On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 9:12 PM Ralph Little  wrote:

> Hi,
> In this case I didn't generate the towncrier files. It's a lot of faff
> if you don't do it as you go along.
> I just put them into a spreadsheet.
>
> I will try to generate the release notes from that.
>
> Cheers,
> Ralph
>
> On 2023-02-04 17:57, m. allan noah wrote:
>
> I have pushed a branch called 'release-1.2.x'. I don't have this
> 'towncrier' thing, so maybe you can run that and merge the release notes?
>
> allan
>
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 11:39 AM m. allan noah 
> wrote:
>
>> Awesome, thanks! I'll probably take a first stab at it on the 4th, and
>> see if I can follow our current instructions.
>>
>> allan
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 8:43 PM Ralph Little 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> I have prepared the release notes whenever you are ready!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>> On 2023-01-24 08:33, m. allan noah wrote:
>>>
>>> Sounds good to me, thanks for your help. I'm traveling this week, and
>>> won't be able to work on this until the weekend.
>>>
>>> On T

Re: [sane-devel] Happy new year- time for a sane-backends release!

[m. allan noah]

This entire thing is a little crazy, because I spent more time fighting
with the automation than I would have spent doing an old manual release.
One of the steps there was simply to edit configure.ac and change the
version number a couple of times. Seems easy enough to 'echo $new_version >
.version' or something like that in this new scheme. I'll do some more
research into how other projects handle this.

And, I noticed the extra comments at the top of the NEWS file were being
displayed in the release notes and manually removed that in the gitlab UI.

allan

On Tue, Feb 7, 2023 at 12:32 AM Ralph Little  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 2023-02-06 20:04, m. allan noah wrote:
>
> Hmm, looks like AC_INIT calls `./tools/git-version-gen --prefix ''
> .tarball-version`, which returns UNKNOWN. Seems like our release process
> might be leaving out some steps. I guess I'll dig more tomorrow.
>
>
> IIRC, this has been a long-standing issue with the tar file included in
> the GitLab release artifacts, in that they don't build. You have to instead
> get the snapshot file.
> I don't know how long it has been like that but we do get a complaint
> every now again. I keep trying to remember to figure out what is going on
> to do something about it.
>
> If it is the thing that I am thinking about, it might also be the thing
> that always stuffs me up in the release PPA because the orig tar file
> requires an extra .gitversion file with the release version in it,
> otherwise it won't build when it is uploaded.
>
> We really need to get our collective heads together and fix it. I don't
> pretend to really understand what the issue is though. Build systems aren't
> really my thing.
>
> 
> As an aside, the release page seems to have some weird guff from the top
> of the NEWS file in there. Not really sure what caused that. It is some of
> the comment material. :`(
>
> Cheers,
> Ralph
>
> allan
>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 10:44 PM m. allan noah  wrote:
>
>> So, I was able to do the release on time (after filling in a few blanks
>> in our documentation). But I only did the website updates tonight. I seem
>> to have run into a small problem there- when I download the release
>> tarball, and run ./autogen.sh, i get a ./configure file which has 'UNKNOWN'
>> as the package version number. This also happens with 1.1.1 as well. Is
>> this happening for anyone else?
>>
>> allan
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 10:05 PM Ralph Little  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> OK, I think I have done that.
>>>
>>> Because we are short on time I cut and pasted the release note fragments
>>> from my spreadsheet into the NEWS file with Apostrophe MD file editor and
>>> whipped them into shape manually.
>>> First time using it and it is pretty good. Obviously, this was a manual
>>> process, but it wasn't too onerous.
>>>
>>> I couldn't get the towncrier thingy to work anyway. I don't really have
>>> much experience with python and pip. Python seems an awful lot more
>>> complicated since the last time I used it :(
>>>
>>> I have pushed the release notes in NEWS to your branch.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>> On 2023-02-04 18:18, m. allan noah wrote:
>>>
>>> Awesome, thanks! I'm working on updating doc/releases.md, which I find
>>> to be hard to use. Maybe if you keep some notes on what you did, I can
>>> incorporate your method instead of towncrier.
>>>
>>> allan
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 4, 2023 at 9:12 PM Ralph Little  wrote:
>>>
 Hi,
 In this case I didn't generate the towncrier files. It's a lot of faff
 if you don't do it as you go along.
 I just put them into a spreadsheet.

 I will try to generate the release notes from that.

 Cheers,
 Ralph

 On 2023-02-04 17:57, m. allan noah wrote:

 I have pushed a branch called 'release-1.2.x'. I don't have this
 'towncrier' thing, so maybe you can run that and merge the release notes?

 allan

 On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 11:39 AM m. allan noah 
 wrote:

> Awesome, thanks! I'll probably take a first stab at it on the 4th, and
> see if I can follow our current instructions.
>
> allan
>
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2023 at 8:43 PM Ralph Little 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I have prepared the release notes whenever you are ready!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ralph
>>
>> On 2023-01-24 08:33, m. allan noah wrote:
>>
>> Sounds good to me, thanks for your help. I'm traveling this week, and
>> won't be able to work on this until the weekend.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023, 10:47 AM Ralph Little 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 2023-01-01 15:54, m. allan noah wrote:
>>> > It has been nearly a year since our last release, and there have
>>> been
>>> > many changes and bug fixes. I'd like to get 1.2.1 released in
>>> early
>>> > February. I've not done it in a few years, but I am certainly
>>> willing
>>> > to make the release package.
>>> >
>>> > Any objections to a c