Re: GNOME 3 status update
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 20:20, Matthias Clasen wrote: > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Vincent Untz wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Le lundi 22 juin 2009, à 13:30 -0400, David Zeuthen a écrit : >>> FWIW, Matthias done a great job both porting apps as well as creating / >>> maintaining this page >>> >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/PolicyKitOne >>> >>> which is useful for both distributors and the GNOME project itself. >>> >>> I guess all this means that PolicyKit doesn't even need to be an >>> external dependency anymore; e.g. basically no apps need to be aware it >>> even exists. >> >> So do we need to migrate all of GNOME at once (ie, commit all the >> patches at once)? Or is it possible to have both old and new PK at the >> same time on the system? > > It is possible. In fact, that is what we have in rawhide currently. > But we really want to have the migration completed before the release, > because it just completely breaks the experience if you have two > separate policies, two different policy editors, etc etc... > ___ Shouldn't the external dependency of policykit be bumped to 0.92 it's now at 0.9 Jaap ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
On Sat, 2009-06-20 at 16:15 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: > Evolution-Data-Server must be migrated to D-Bus by default > = > NOT COMPLETED. Evolution schedule currently discussed. > Git branch at > http://git.gnome.org/cgit/evolution-data-server/log/?h=dbus > > dbus-hybrid e-d-s branch has fresh addressbook port for eds using dbus. Ross had pushed that yesterday. It should move us ~50% closer towards the target, with Calendar needs to be worked upon. We are working at reviewing/testing the addressbook/dbus port and driving towards the calendar stuff. > = > Evolution to get rid of Bonobo by 2.27.3 > = > NOT COMPLETED and postponed for 2.29.1. > > See http://www.go-evolution.org/KillBonobo . > Git branch at http://git.gnome.org/cgit/evolution/log/?h=kill-bonobo > Testing and reporting bugs is HIGHLY welcome. See > http://mbarnes.livejournal.com/2606.html I really want the KB to be part of 2.27.x cycle, given the volume of changes and the impact it could create. Longer testing cycle would imply a stable Evolution 3.0. And so I'm preparing a proposal for this. Things should be more clear in a week's time, I guess. http://mail.gnome.org/archives/release-team/2009-June/msg00018.html -Srini. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Vincent Untz wrote: > Hi, > > Le lundi 22 juin 2009, à 13:30 -0400, David Zeuthen a écrit : >> FWIW, Matthias done a great job both porting apps as well as creating / >> maintaining this page >> >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/PolicyKitOne >> >> which is useful for both distributors and the GNOME project itself. >> >> I guess all this means that PolicyKit doesn't even need to be an >> external dependency anymore; e.g. basically no apps need to be aware it >> even exists. > > So do we need to migrate all of GNOME at once (ie, commit all the > patches at once)? Or is it possible to have both old and new PK at the > same time on the system? It is possible. In fact, that is what we have in rawhide currently. But we really want to have the migration completed before the release, because it just completely breaks the experience if you have two separate policies, two different policy editors, etc etc... ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
Hi, Le lundi 22 juin 2009, à 13:30 -0400, David Zeuthen a écrit : > FWIW, Matthias done a great job both porting apps as well as creating / > maintaining this page > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/PolicyKitOne > > which is useful for both distributors and the GNOME project itself. > > I guess all this means that PolicyKit doesn't even need to be an > external dependency anymore; e.g. basically no apps need to be aware it > even exists. So do we need to migrate all of GNOME at once (ie, commit all the patches at once)? Or is it possible to have both old and new PK at the same time on the system? Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
On Sat, 2009-06-20 at 16:15 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: > = > Complete migration from HAL to DeviceKit-* by 2.27.3 This also includes libudev/libgudev - the latter is available in udev >= 143 which was just released. > = > NOT COMPLETED. > According to "jhbuild rdepends hal --direct" the following modules still > depend on HAL: > * brasero: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=581742 > * cheese: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=583640 > * gnome-power-manager FIXED: > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=565867 Also, gvfs needs porting but Martin Pitt is on top of this: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=586410 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=586409 I'll review and commit Martin's patches shortly. > * Porting to PolicyKit 1.0 > PATCHES awaiting review/commit: gdm, gconf, gconf-editor, > gnome-applets, gnome-panel, gnome-session With PolicyKit 1.0, the model has changed [1] insofar that we don't need to make clients of mechanisms using PolicyKit aware of PolicyKit itself. So the port, GNOME-wise, actually only includes ripping out support for PolicyKit, in particular the libpolkit-gnome.so.0 library which is no more. There are a couple of pieces of GNOME software where we also provide our own mechanism - GConf is one of those. But with the way things work, this dependency isn't exposed in any public API, e.g. it's possible to port the GConf defaults mechanism to use another authorization framework if the OS happens to supply one. Finally, there is still a polkit-gnome project. This package contains a PolicyKit Authentication Agent (to pop up authentication dialogs when needed) and will also contain a tool to modify the local authority (not yet written but will be done before 2.28). This project does not provide any API, only said Authentication Agent and the tool. FWIW, Matthias done a great job both porting apps as well as creating / maintaining this page http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/PolicyKitOne which is useful for both distributors and the GNOME project itself. I guess all this means that PolicyKit doesn't even need to be an external dependency anymore; e.g. basically no apps need to be aware it even exists. Hope this clarifies. David [1] : See http://hal.freedesktop.org/docs/polkit/PolicyKit-1.8.html for more information about how this works. In particular this change means that our GNOME software is much more portable insofar that OS vendors / distributors / sites / etc. can plug in their own implementation of the Authority. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
Matthew Barnes writes: > On Sat, 2009-06-20 at 10:30 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: > > What is not covered is creation of thumbnails, for which we probably > > have to wait for the outcome of the 'thumbnailing service' ideas that > > are being floated... > > Is GnomeDesktopThumbnailFactory recommended for the interim? Yes, as A. Walton said, the code was moved from libgnomeui to gnomedesktop since it is the only remaining piece of libgnomeui that doesn't have a replacement. Generally, libgnomedesktop is the place to put things that are not platform, but still should be shared among desktop components. Soren ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
Hi, Matthias Clasen wrote: On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Andre Klapper wrote: I can see several options here: * This is a problem of those older distros and upstream gtk+ does not need to care about it * If'def a lot of code in the affected modules * Introduce those API additions to upstream gtk+ 2.12.x and publish a 2.12.13 tarball No, GTK+ 2.12 is a stable (in fact, even a dead) branch at this point, that we are not going to open up for new API at this point. The idea of stable branches in GTK+ is that you can rely on the fact that if it built against 2.x.y, it will also build and work against 2.x.z with z < y. Nevermind that enterprise distros are unlikely to follow such an unprecedented stability-breaking late release anyway... That all depends on what is happening right now - are people using stock 2.12, or patching 2.12 to address the issues Hub addresses? Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member dne...@gnome.org ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Andre Klapper wrote: > I can see several options here: > * This is a problem of those older distros and upstream gtk+ does > not need to care about it > * If'def a lot of code in the affected modules > * Introduce those API additions to upstream gtk+ 2.12.x and > publish a 2.12.13 tarball No, GTK+ 2.12 is a stable (in fact, even a dead) branch at this point, that we are not going to open up for new API at this point. The idea of stable branches in GTK+ is that you can rely on the fact that if it built against 2.x.y, it will also build and work against 2.x.z with z < y. Nevermind that enterprise distros are unlikely to follow such an unprecedented stability-breaking late release anyway... Matthias ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
Am Samstag, den 20.06.2009, 13:28 -0400 schrieb Hubert Figuiere: > On 06/20/2009 10:15 AM, Andre Klapper wrote: > > * GSEAL: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=585391 > > To Do: A lot. Developers please start taking a look at this. > GSEAL has a few outstanding bugs open that make its use impossible. > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=562937 > > To me that one is a show stopper. Thanks a lot for bringing this up! I agree. A statement of the gtk+ folks about their commitment to their GSEAL plans would not hurt. > Non withstanding the fact that some very common accessors like > gtk_widget_get_window() are 2.14 only which is a very big annoyance for > people we who / need to maintain compatibility with older version (look > at what some enterprise distro or devices ship, like SLED10, RHEL4, Maemo). I can see several options here: * This is a problem of those older distros and upstream gtk+ does not need to care about it * If'def a lot of code in the affected modules * Introduce those API additions to upstream gtk+ 2.12.x and publish a 2.12.13 tarball andre -- mailto:ak...@gmx.net | failed http://www.iomc.de/ | http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
On 06/20/2009 10:15 AM, Andre Klapper wrote: > * GSEAL: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=585391 > To Do: A lot. Developers please start taking a look at this. GSEAL has a few outstanding bugs open that make its use impossible. http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=562937 To me that one is a show stopper. Non withstanding the fact that some very common accessors like gtk_widget_get_window() are 2.14 only which is a very big annoyance for people we who / need to maintain compatibility with older version (look at what some enterprise distro or devices ship, like SLED10, RHEL4, Maemo). Hub ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Matthew Barnes wrote: > On Sat, 2009-06-20 at 10:30 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: >> What is not covered is creation of thumbnails, for which we probably >> have to wait for the outcome of the 'thumbnailing service' ideas that >> are being floated... > > Is GnomeDesktopThumbnailFactory recommended for the interim? I believe the code was moved to gnome-desktop and updated there to get away from the last libgnome(ui) dependency that Nautilus would otherwise have. But it seems that it is the only other choice library-wise at this time. -A. Walton > > Matthew Barnes > > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
On Sat, 2009-06-20 at 10:30 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: > What is not covered is creation of thumbnails, for which we probably > have to wait for the outcome of the 'thumbnailing service' ideas that > are being floated... Is GnomeDesktopThumbnailFactory recommended for the interim? Matthew Barnes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
On Sat, 2009-06-20 at 16:15 +0200, Andre Klapper wrote: > > > = > ZERO modules dependening on gnome-vfs > = > NOT COMPLETED (Reopened): > average: 1 (gst-plugins-base) This is really a WONTFIX. Distributors shouldn't be shipping it anyway, as it would take over GIO for file reading, and fail miserably for any resources that require authentication (say, sftp or smb). ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 status update
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Andre Klapper wrote: > Ahoj, > = > THE PROBLEMS: What migration paths are missing? > = > libgnomeui provides retrieving thumbnails of files. > There is no substitute yet. Retrieving of thumbnails is covered in gio/gvfs with the file attributes thumbnail::path thumbnail::failed preview::icon What is not covered is creation of thumbnails, for which we probably have to wait for the outcome of the 'thumbnailing service' ideas that are being floated... Matthias ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
