Re: meson ground rules!
On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 11:07 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > Hi, > > Some GNOME modules have started to experiment with switching to the > meson build system instead of Autotools. Personally, I want to > encourage this; even though as a project we haven't come to any > consensus on whether we want to do a wholesale migration to meson, I > think it's starting to look likely as its advantages over Autotools > and > CMake are pretty clear to me. But we still need to make sure it's > easy > for contributors to build GNOME. So a couple ground rules for this > from > release team: > > * Projects using meson are encouraged (although not required) to > continue maintaining the Autotools build in parallel for GNOME 3.24 > as > meson continues to mature. We will consider recommending the removal > of > Autotools builds in the GNOME 3.26 timeframe. > > * Projects that choose to remove the Autotools build system must not > require meson newer than 0.34.0. We'll set a higher permissible > version > requirement for GNOME 3.26 next spring. > > * Make sure your module builds in JHBuild. Important: do not switch > JHBuild to use the meson module type until you have released a > tarball > that includes the meson build system. > > * For GNOME 3.24, make sure your module builds in Continuous. You'll > have to add a patch that adds a fake configure script and a fake > Makefile. I do not believe this requirement is desirable going > forward > -- if we do a large scale switch to meson, then Continuous is just > going to have to learn to grok our new build system -- but let's not > break it now. * Ditto for Flatpak nightly applications > Thanks for helping make sure our release process goes smoothly, > > Michael > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
GNOME 3.23.2 released
Hi all, GNOME 3.23.2, the second development release in the GNOME 3.24 cycle, is now available. If you want to compile GNOME 3.23.2 by yourself, you can use the jhbuild modulesets available here: https://download.gnome.org/teams/releng/3.23.2/ The lists of updated modules and changes are available here: core - https://download.gnome.org/core/3.23/3.23.2/NEWS apps - https://download.gnome.org/apps/3.23/3.23.2/NEWS The source packages are available here: core - https://download.gnome.org/core/3.23/3.23.2/sources/ apps - https://download.gnome.org/apps/3.23/3.23.2/sources/ There is a mistake with the gtksourceview version in the NEWS file as we did not yet include GTK+ 4, but the right GTK+ 3 version is also available in the sources. Since this is a development release intended for GNOME developers, I'm going to take the opportunity to complain that several core modules seem to have fallen into a habit of releasing a day or two *after* we have prepared the overall GNOME releases, which is why you see many modules have been upgraded from 3.22 to 3.23.1 in this release. It would be great if we could avoid this next month. Thanks to the many developers who helped with getting this release out on time. WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! -- This release is a snapshot of early development code. Although it is buildable and usable, it is primarily intended for testing and hacking purposes. GNOME uses odd minor version numbers to indicate development status. For more information about 3.23, the full schedule, the official module lists and the proposed module lists, please see: http://www.gnome.org/start/unstable For a quick overview of the GNOME schedule, please see: http://live.gnome.org/Schedule On behalf of the release team, Michael Catanzaro ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: meson ground rules!
On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 12:48 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 11:07 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > > * Projects that choose to remove the Autotools build system must > not > > require meson newer than 0.34.0. We'll set a higher permissible > > version > > requirement for GNOME 3.26 next spring. > > In the interest of clarity: meson 0.34.0 will be the max dependency > for > GNOME 3.24. (If you switch the JHBuild moduleset to use meson. If you keep the Autotools build and do not switch JHBuild to use meson, then you can of course require whatever version of meson you please.) Michael ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: meson ground rules!
On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 11:07 -0600, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > * Projects that choose to remove the Autotools build system must not > require meson newer than 0.34.0. We'll set a higher permissible > version > requirement for GNOME 3.26 next spring. In the interest of clarity: meson 0.34.0 will be the max dependency for GNOME 3.24. Michael ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Script to format the functions in a C header?
Christian Hergert writes: > I think Owen wrote an elisp macro for Emacs years ago called > "GNOME-align-args" or something like that. That one *might* have > handled blocks of functions. For what it's worth, I wrote such elisp some time ago: http://elpa.gnu.org/packages/gnome-c-style.html If anyone is trying to implement the feature somewhere, I would suggest to provide two separate scripts or commands to do the job: (1) guess the alignment rule somehow, e.g. from the existing C code, and (2) do the actual formatting. That would be helpful to avoid unnecessary formatting changes when creating a patch for existing projects. Regards, -- Daiki Ueno ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
meson ground rules!
Hi, Some GNOME modules have started to experiment with switching to the meson build system instead of Autotools. Personally, I want to encourage this; even though as a project we haven't come to any consensus on whether we want to do a wholesale migration to meson, I think it's starting to look likely as its advantages over Autotools and CMake are pretty clear to me. But we still need to make sure it's easy for contributors to build GNOME. So a couple ground rules for this from release team: * Projects using meson are encouraged (although not required) to continue maintaining the Autotools build in parallel for GNOME 3.24 as meson continues to mature. We will consider recommending the removal of Autotools builds in the GNOME 3.26 timeframe. * Projects that choose to remove the Autotools build system must not require meson newer than 0.34.0. We'll set a higher permissible version requirement for GNOME 3.26 next spring. * Make sure your module builds in JHBuild. Important: do not switch JHBuild to use the meson module type until you have released a tarball that includes the meson build system. * For GNOME 3.24, make sure your module builds in Continuous. You'll have to add a patch that adds a fake configure script and a fake Makefile. I do not believe this requirement is desirable going forward -- if we do a large scale switch to meson, then Continuous is just going to have to learn to grok our new build system -- but let's not break it now. Thanks for helping make sure our release process goes smoothly, Michael ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Mailman Upgrade: Wednesday 23th of November, 09:00 - 10:00 CET
Hi, tomorrow we'll be performing a minor version upgrade of our Mailman instance, specifically from release 2.1.15 to release 2.1.23 [1]. The following services won't be reachable (mails will be kept in the queue and flushed as soon as the upgrade has happened) during the maintenance: 1. mail.gnome.org The upgrade has been specifically scheduled to resolve the mass un-subscriptions a few list owners have been reporting since the time Yahoo and AOL (and any other DMARC aware domain) have decided to enforce DMARC policies. On this side there will be two user visible changes: 1. the From address will be modified (From: Andrea Veri ) 2. the Reply-To header will be modified as well (Reply-To: , 3. the first and second point will be true only for the senders behind a domain that has a DMARC policy published on the DNS (it being reject or quarantine or none. Mailman makes a call against the DNS resolvers and looks for a DMARC record for the target domain) This particular option can be overridden on a per-list basis with the following values [3]: 1. Reject 2. Discard As usual please keep an eye at [2]. Have a great day, [1] http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mailman-coders/mailman/2.1/view/head:/NEWS [2] https://status.gnome.org [3] https://wiki.list.org/DEV/DMARC -- Cheers, Andrea Debian Developer, Fedora / EPEL packager, GNOME Infrastructure Team Coordinator, GNOME Foundation Board of Directors Secretary, GNOME Foundation Membership & Elections Committee Chairman Homepage: http://www.gnome.org/~av ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
