Is this cycle's release of glade/libglade going to include
GtkHeaderBar? I looked through the git history and I didn't see
anything in there that indicated that anytihng was done.
This:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=700914
shows some progress. But it seems we have missed the cut of
On Sun, 2014-08-31 at 12:37 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
> GTK+ 3.4
> * GtkApplication (add buildable iface to support GMenuModel?¿)
Dude, I'd worry about GtkApplicationWindow before thinking about
GtkHeaderBar. It's pretty clear at this point that nobody has used Glade
to develop GNOME applica
On 8/31/2014 10:30 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Sun, 2014-08-31 at 12:37 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
>> GTK+ 3.4
>> * GtkApplication (add buildable iface to support GMenuModel?¿)
>
> Dude, I'd worry about GtkApplicationWindow before thinking about
> GtkHeaderBar. It's pretty clear at this
On Sun, 2014-08-31 at 22:34 +0200, Maciej Piechotka wrote:
> Glade supports GtkApplicationWindow - at least version 3.18.3 - so the
> TODO might be out of date or mean something else.
Well that's good :(
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_
On Aug 31, 2014 1:30 PM, "Michael Catanzaro" wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2014-08-31 at 12:37 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
> > GTK+ 3.4
> > * GtkApplication (add buildable iface to support GMenuModel?¿)
>
> Dude, I'd worry about GtkApplicationWindow before thinking about
> GtkHeaderBar. It's pretty clear
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna
wrote:
> If it is a problem with developer resources, perhaps I can try
> to find someone who is willing to help out provided there is a mentor?
I'd be willing to work on this. I tried to get into GNOME development
previously, but never got a
On Sun, 2014-08-31 at 15:25 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
> Well it seems that is there. It would be nice to get some support for
> GtkHeaderBar in glade. Barring that, let's at least see some
> documentation in developer.gnome.org for javascript and vala. Right
> now, it doesn't exist. I fou
Hey,
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
> the C++, Python, and JS examples in
> gnome-devel-demos. If nobody volunteers to review them before 3.16, then
> I think they should be removed.
>
I really don't think you should remove them. Having something there is
better than no
On Sep 1, 2014 6:28 PM, "meg ford" wrote:
>
> Hey,
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Michael Catanzaro
wrote:
>>
>> the C++, Python, and JS examples in
>> gnome-devel-demos. If nobody volunteers to review them before 3.16, then
>> I think they should be removed.
>
>
> I really don't think you sho
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Joey Hain wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna
> wrote:
>
>> If it is a problem with developer resources, perhaps I can try
>> to find someone who is willing to help out provided there is a mentor?
>
>
> I'd be willing to work on this. I tri
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:43 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
>
> On Sep 1, 2014 6:28 PM, "meg ford" wrote:
> >
> > Hey,
> > On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:04 PM, Michael Catanzaro
> wrote:
> >>
> >> the C++, Python, and JS examples in
> >> gnome-devel-demos. If nobody volunteers to review them before 3.1
On Mon, 2014-09-01 at 20:28 -0500, meg ford wrote:
> I really don't think you should remove them. Having something there is
> better than nothing,
I don't think so. Posting outdated information not only makes us look
bad, it forces developers to question the validity of all the other
material we
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
Michael,
> I don't think so. Posting outdated information not only makes us look
> bad, it forces developers to question the validity of all the other
> material we present. Better if they only have access to the good,
> updated documentat
Hey,
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Michael Catanzaro
> wrote:
>
> Michael,
>
> > I don't think so. Posting outdated information not only makes us look
> > bad, it forces developers to question the validity of all the other
> > material we present. Better if they only have access to the good,
On Tue, 2014-09-02 at 14:43 +0200, Gian Mario Tagliaretti wrote:
> in a previous post you mentioned outdated python examples, can you
> point it out? I had a quick look (maybe too quick) but it looks to me
> that the examples use the introspected bindings already.
Here: https://developer.gnome.org
hi;
On 2 September 2014 14:02, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-09-02 at 14:43 +0200, Gian Mario Tagliaretti wrote:
>> in a previous post you mentioned outdated python examples, can you
>> point it out? I had a quick look (maybe too quick) but it looks to me
>> that the examples use the in
On Tue, 2014-09-02 at 08:02 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-09-02 at 14:43 +0200, Gian Mario Tagliaretti wrote:
> > in a previous post you mentioned outdated python examples, can you
> > point it out? I had a quick look (maybe too quick) but it looks to me
> > that the examples use t
On Tue, 2014-09-02 at 08:57 -0700, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote:
> As far as I see, the same applies for every language. None of them
> has
> GtkHeaderBar, though it does not mean than everything else is wrong or
> outdated, it's just incomplete.
Of the two pages I checked in platform-overview, both
The GTK+ docs have a step-by-step example that does focus on new
widgets such as GtkSearchBar, GtkHeaderBar, GtkApplication, etc:
https://developer.gnome.org/gtk3/3.13/ch01s05.html
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
https:/
Michael Catanzaro wrote:
...
> I haven't looked over the platform-demos yet, and certainly at none of
> the Python ones, besides to note that the screenshots look very
> outdated. As a developer, this makes me question the relevance of the
> material.
>
> I'm not saying the material is bad, just t
Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
...
> We need a volunteer or many volunteer who can help here. Happily will
> mentor or find a mentor who is willing to put the time.
>
> Anybody interested in getting this reviewed and working?
I was primarily referring to the documentation website and related
infrastru
Allan Day wrote:
> Much of these issues come down to infrastructure, in my opinion. It's
> hard to get into writing docs, the website doesn't show what's new or
> updated, and it is slow to get new material online. Fred's done a
> fantastic job keeping library.gnome.org going, but we probably need
Google is particularly shit at pointing people to the correct version. If
we choose to have multiple versions still, we should put a giant warning at
the stop saying it's not the current version, and perhaps have a version
switcher.
Also, while we're modifying the version infrastructure, can we ma
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Allan Day wrote:
> Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
> ...
>> We need a volunteer or many volunteer who can help here. Happily will
>> mentor or find a mentor who is willing to put the time.
>>
>> Anybody interested in getting this reviewed and working?
>
> I was primarily
On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 14:46 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> Fred's done a
> fantastic job keeping library.gnome.org going, but we probably need
> something else (or at least major improvements).
I did not know this existed!
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 08:11 -0700, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> Google is particularly shit at pointing people to the correct version.
> If we choose to have multiple versions still, we should put a giant
> warning at the stop saying it's not the current version, and perhaps
> have a version switcher
Am Donnerstag, den 04.09.2014, 20:55 +0200 schrieb Andre Klapper:
> Is there a Bugzilla ticket already about displaying a warning banner?
>
> With regard to internet search engine indexing,
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=509424 was about "Only let
> search engined index stable, unsta
On Sep 4, 2014 6:47 AM, "Allan Day" wrote:
> None of this is new news of course - we've talked about it a lot in
> the past, and some work has been done. The problem is that no one has
> found the (probably significant) time to resolve the issues we're
> facing.
>
We need a volunteer or many vol
Frederic Peters wrote:
...
> Since the hackfest in Norwich in January it's possible to get specific
> modules online (almost) directly after the git commits. It is
> configured that way for gnome-user-docs and gnome-getting-started-docs
> (for help. gnome.org) and for gnome-devel-docs (developer
Allan Day wrote:
> However, before we go down that route, it seems like we should at
> least discuss whether library-web is the best option going forward. It
I would tend to put goals before technical details, but library-web as
it is nowadays is certainly not the best option; I addressed a few o
While I'm sure a dynamic site would be a great idea in the far future, are
there any small, actionable goals we can make for this?
We all dream of a great docs scenario, but we never properly plan for it.
What small wins can we get today, right now, to improve the experience? I
have some free time
On Thu, 2014-09-04 at 19:50 +0200, Frederic Peters wrote:
> []
> No, I think the obstacle is that we don't have enough people willing
> to work on developer documentation over something else, even though
> many will recognize the importance it has. It's not new.
Touché.
--
Germán Poo-Caamaño
Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> While I'm sure a dynamic site would be a great idea in the far future, are
> there any small, actionable goals we can make for this?
>
> We all dream of a great docs scenario, but we never properly plan for it.
> What small wins can we get today, right now, to improve th
Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> While I'm sure a dynamic site would be a great idea in the far future, are
> there any small, actionable goals we can make for this?
As Fred already said, this list is probably the critical priority -
https://wiki.gnome.org/DocumentationProject/Tasks/DeveloperDocs#deve
Frederic Peters wrote:
...
> I would tend to put goals before technical details, but library-web as
> it is nowadays is certainly not the best option; I addressed a few of
> the issues in my mail to gnome-doc-devel-list@. ...
>> * Hackability ...
>> * User experience ...
>> * Documentation w
Allan Day wrote:
> One of the reasons why I wanted to have this conversation is to find
> out if there are any third party solutions that we could use, rather
> than having to write and maintain our own site from scratch? Is Read
> the Docs [1] an option?
It's a first look from that perspective,
On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 11:24 +0200, Frederic Peters wrote:
> Allan Day wrote:
>
> > One of the reasons why I wanted to have this conversation is to find
> > out if there are any third party solutions that we could use, rather
> > than having to write and maintain our own site from scratch? Is Read
Hi Shaun,
> How much maintenance burden is there for the general infrastructure of
> library-web, versus the burden of the various converters and such that
> we'd have to deal with anyway if plugging them into another system?
There's not much maintenance required, for example new modules are
auto
Frederic Peters wrote:
...
>> RTD has been hugely popular in the Python world, but it's not the only
>> continuous deployment or automated docs build system out there. Red Hat
>> and Fedora use Publican for almost everything. OpenStack has a big pile
>> of Maven code that builds its site. There ar
> Frederic Peters wrote:
>> ... I'd prefer to have ideas on the structure we
>> want before we go looking for the appropriate software (or changes to
>> the library-web code base).
...
Thinking about this, if we are going to do something homebrew, then I
can I can come up with more detailed plans
Shaun McCance wrote:
...
> RTD has been hugely popular in the Python world, but it's not the only
> continuous deployment or automated docs build system out there. Red Hat
> and Fedora use Publican for almost everything. ...
The Red Hat Publican deployment seems fairly custom - it is pretty
nice,
On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 18:52 +0100, Allan Day wrote:
> Shaun McCance wrote:
> ...
> > RTD has been hugely popular in the Python world, but it's not the only
> > continuous deployment or automated docs build system out there. Red Hat
> > and Fedora use Publican for almost everything. ...
>
> The Re
I wrote:
> There are a few outstanding bugs (old development versions are pruned
> from the index files but not from the server, and are getting indexed by
> Google), [...]
That particular bug has now been fixed, old development versions are
now properly removed from the server; however I don't k
Shaun McCance wrote:
...
> It is worth looking into sharing solutions with other projects. But most
> projects seem to do what we've done: home-brew a solution that fits
> exactly their needs. Hard to share that.
In that case, I've got some mockups in the works for a new site:
https://github.com
44 matches
Mail list logo
