Hi! On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Jon Nordby <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Luka Čehovin <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> As I have said in my first email on this list my first self-assigned >> task was to make mypaint store config according to XDG Base directory >> specification. I have now committed a working version to my repository >> (http://gitorious.org/~lukacu/mypaint/lukacu-mypaint). I would >> appreciate if somebody would take a few minutes and test it out. I >> have only used mypaint for a week or so ... therefore my user >> configuration structure is not as ... elaborate :) > > Nice to see new development. I have not tested or review this much, but here > is a couple of early comments. Please read the following wikipage written by > Martin: http://wiki.mypaint.info/index.php?title=Clean_patch
Yup ... have stumbled upon that in the past days. At the moment my intention was just that somebody tries to test it. I can cut it up in specific patches if it works. Of course I can also do that only based on my experience, but i think that would be irresponsible as we are dealing with some fundamental things here (configuration and platform specific stuff) > > Specifically there is three unrelated changes in the code up until now (as > you mention in the mail). Unrelated changes should never be in the same > commit. And some of the commit messages are not very readable without > context. Also, when possible try to keep a linear development history (ie: > prefer rebasing and/or cherrypick instead of merging in other branches). > Using branches for invasive or experimental changes is also nice. Where to > set that line is a matter of taste ofc. Personally I keep everything I don't > think can/should go straight into mainline in its own branch. They are > practically free in git anyways. > Things will be much easier to review and merge if you follow this. I will have to learn the git-way of doing things yes. So far i have only worked with SVN and in teams where it was fine even if one committed more unrelated changes together (as long as they were documented). I guess some additional discipline will be required. > >> >> * I have also changed the build so that a binary executable is used on >> Linux instead of modified mypaint.py. The good thing of this is that >> now the name of the process is actually mypaint and not python. If >> anyone knows of some downsides to this approach please let me know. > > Is that the issue you're wanting to solve here? That the current name of the > process is not "mypaint"? I'm not sure of any specific issues with this, but > it seems like quite the hack for something so trivial (in my eyes). > hm ... well my opinion is that it is not a hack nor a trivial thing. The name of the process is an usability issue (e.g. trying to see how much memory does myspace use having several python scripts running). Since it is almost a requirement on windows I see no harm in using it also in Linux. -- Luka Čehovin http://luka.tnode.com _______________________________________________ Mypaint-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/mypaint-discuss
