Re: GNOME 2.23 Schedule
natan yellin wrote on 21/03/08 07:32: On 3/20/08, *Federico Mena Quintero* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... The problem we've had so far is that someone does a good analysis of login time, things get fixed, but then over time things get gradually worse. Mozilla uses Tinderbox to constantly rebuild software, and then tests each successful build to measure how long it takes to start up (amongst other things). http://tinyurl.com/2shnre This lets developers see performance regressions as soon as they happen. Perhaps something similar is possible for Gnome. It would be nice to be able to get a fresh profile at any moment, just to see that things didn't get screwed up. A Guest account, which has a fresh profile on every login, would also be a useful feature for those cases where I lend my laptop to someone for a few minutes so they can check their e-mail. (I don't want to have to set up a new user account for someone who probably won't use that computer again.) ... Ubuntu's new brainstorm page is pretty cool. Would you have time to implement something similar for GNOME? I quite like the idea of a digg for feature ideas that we could reuse in various places. It would be useful, but perhaps it would be better to just get our own category over there. The number of people who use Gnome without it being supplied as part of their operating system is tiny, so it would likely make little sense for Gnome to have its own Brainstorm site. However, Ubuntu is not the only operating system that uses Gnome, and it would be unreasonable for (for example) people interested in proposing an idea for Gnome in Opensuse to be pointed to an Ubuntu site. If we have our own brainstorm website, a lot of the ideas are going to be duplicates and there'll be two places to discuss and vote on everything. ... We already have that problem in Ubuntu itself, with at least four different places to propose ideas (Brainstorm, Launchpad Bugs, Launchpad Blueprints, and various pages on the Ubuntu wiki). Ideally there would be a way of linking and syncing feature requests between Ubuntu and the various other operating systems that use Gnome -- similar to how Launchpad links and syncs the status of bug reports in bugzilla.gnome.org and other bug trackers. However, the first step would be to have a semi-standard way of representing feature requests, and that hasn't happened yet (bug : bug report :: feature request : ???). Cheers -- Matthew Paul Thomas http://mpt.net.nz/ ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: install-module on master.gnome.org
On 3/21/08, daniel g. siegel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Do, 2008-03-20 at 22:39 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 05:33:38PM -0400, Andrew Cowie wrote: On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 22:26 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: - checking of sane versions (no 'rc1' 'beta1' etc) Why not? If a project wants to do that, that's their business. Because it confuses the ordering. There is no reliable way to determine the latest versions. isnt there ls -v, which we could use for that? Aside of install-module, versions with alphabetic characters also confuses all wellknown package managers for the same reason. So in addition to patching install-module, all packagers also need to do various kinds of ugly hacks in order to get the ordering right. Just because a project wants to name their version something broken, doesn't mean the naming is less broken by design. The world would be a better place if all releases used x.y or x.y.z version names. Christian ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: install-module on master.gnome.org
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 4:06 AM, Vincent Untz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Le jeudi 20 mars 2008, à 22:27 -0400, Andrew Cowie a écrit : On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 22:39 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: There is no reliable way to determine the latest versions. You said you'd be working in Python; the Gentoo linux people have some excellent ordering algorithms embodied in Portage. I can ask around to find out the particular code to look at if you're interested. But either way, it'd be nice if we can manage to make this not be a bugaboo that gets in your way. I know we're going to keep using rc's. Any reason to not switch to the GNOME module versioning scheme? See http://developer.gnome.org/gep/gep-4.html It's not mandatory, but it makes it easier for a lot of people to use the same scheme. Not all parts of gep-4 are mandatory. But that gep is 6 years old, and since that time *every* gnome module has adopted the numeric-characters-(and-period-)only rule...except for very recent versions of java-gnome. In fact, I would have stuck this exact piece of information on http://live.gnome.org/ReleasePlanning/ModuleRequirements when writing that, except for the fact that I noticed all modules were already following it so I didn't think it was worth repeating. In my opinion, this part of the gep should be mandatory for the reasons Olav and Christian has pointed out. Elijah ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
