François, David, all,
After incorporation of patches to change the path to the documentation, the current state of the GIT branches v3.5.13-sru seems to be ready to release 3.5.13.1. Please, are there any other patches that should be included? Errors that should be resolved? Anything else for what should be a release postponed?
For example:
Should I incorporate the latest patches from Darrell for KPDF? + http://trinity-devel.pearsoncomputing.net/?0::10089 + http://trinity-devel.pearsoncomputing.net/?0::10090
It should first resolve bugs reported by François? As: + http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1151 + http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1159
Furthermore, I would like to ask: François, David, can you test build using GIT branch v3.5.13-sru or you need first tarballs? Note: With updated scripts and branch v3.5.13-sru on meta-project 'tde' is now easy switching GIT to branch v3.5.13-sru.
I look forward to hearing your opinions and comments.
Slávek --
Le 18/09/2012 21:50, Slávek Banko a écrit :
François, David, all,
After incorporation of patches to change the path to the documentation, the current state of the GIT branches v3.5.13-sru seems to be ready to release 3.5.13.1. Please, are there any other patches that should be included? Errors that should be resolved? Anything else for what should be a release postponed?
Good news! On my side, I have no patch to include to 3.5.13.1 at the moment.
For example:
Should I incorporate the latest patches from Darrell for KPDF?
I think these patches are too young to be included in 3.5.13.1 .
It should first resolve bugs reported by François? As:
These ones are build issue, I can live without them, other people did not even mention them.
Furthermore, I would like to ask: François, David, can you test build using GIT branch v3.5.13-sru or you need first tarballs? Note: With updated scripts and branch v3.5.13-sru on meta-project 'tde' is now easy switching GIT to branch v3.5.13-sru.
I'd prefer to have final tarballs to test in real conditions.
I look forward to hearing your opinions and comments.
Slávek
Thanks Francois
On Wednesday 19 of September 2012 07:02:42 Francois Andriot wrote:
Le 18/09/2012 21:50, Slávek Banko a écrit :
François, David, all,
After incorporation of patches to change the path to the
documentation, the
current state of the GIT branches v3.5.13-sru seems to be ready to
release
3.5.13.1. Please, are there any other patches that should be included?
Errors
that should be resolved? Anything else for what should be a release postponed?
Good news! On my side, I have no patch to include to 3.5.13.1 at the
moment.
For example:
Should I incorporate the latest patches from Darrell for KPDF?
I think these patches are too young to be included in 3.5.13.1 .
It should first resolve bugs reported by François? As:
These ones are build issue, I can live without them, other people did not even mention them.
Furthermore, I would like to ask: François, David, can you test build
using
GIT branch v3.5.13-sru or you need first tarballs? Note: With updated
scripts
and branch v3.5.13-sru on meta-project 'tde' is now easy switching GIT
to
branch v3.5.13-sru.
I'd prefer to have final tarballs to test in real conditions.
I look forward to hearing your opinions and comments.
Slávek
Thanks Francois
François, you can find tarballs on: http://ppa.quickbuild.pearsoncomputing.net/trinity/releases/3.5.13.1/
Are named with "~rc1" to have the possibility to add some latest patches before the final release. Currently, one patch, which will be included surely => setting the version number. A further two new patches that I would like included. Please, can you also test this patches?
All of these patches are attached to the report: http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1130
Thanks, Slávek --
A little nit-pickin'.
It's time for konqueror's Help => About konqueror to identify as 3.5.13.1 versus "konqueror 3.5.10" -- is it not? See attached image -- if images are permitted in a posting...
jonesy@nix4:~$ dpkg -l | grep konqueror ii konqueror-nsplugins-trinity 4:3.5.13-1ubuntu0+ax2~lucid Netscape plugin ... ii konqueror-trinity 4:3.5.13-1ubuntu0+ax2~lucid KDE's advanced ...
And, should not that be "Trinity's advanced file manager, web browser ...." above?
Thanks to all the hard working, dedicate team members of the Trinity project for supporting the Most Comfortable desktop environment I've ever used!
Jonesy
On Sunday 23 of September 2012 19:31:35 Jonesy wrote:
A little nit-pickin'.
It's time for konqueror's Help => About konqueror to identify as 3.5.13.1 versus "konqueror 3.5.10" -- is it not? See attached image -- if images are permitted in a posting...
jonesy@nix4:~$ dpkg -l | grep konqueror ii konqueror-nsplugins-trinity 4:3.5.13-1ubuntu0+ax2~lucid Netscape plugin ... ii konqueror-trinity 4:3.5.13-1ubuntu0+ax2~lucid KDE's advanced ...
And, should not that be "Trinity's advanced file manager, web browser ...." above?
Thanks to all the hard working, dedicate team members of the Trinity project for supporting the Most Comfortable desktop environment I've ever used!
Jonesy
It has a simple reason. Although the version number 3.5.13.1 is common for TDE release, applications still have their individual version numbers. For example - KMail has version 1.9.10, Kopete 0.12.7,...
For packages is used common version number TDE release. For this reason, the version number of package may be different from individual version number of the program.
Slavek --
Le 23/09/2012 16:51, Slávek Banko a écrit :
François, you can find tarballs on: http://ppa.quickbuild.pearsoncomputing.net/trinity/releases/3.5.13.1/
Are named with "~rc1" to have the possibility to add some latest patches before the final release. Currently, one patch, which will be included surely => setting the version number. A further two new patches that I would like included. Please, can you also test this patches?
All of these patches are attached to the report: http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1130
Thanks, Slávek
Hello, thanks for the tarballs :-) I've built and tested TDE 3.5.13.1~rc1 up to kdebase package, including bug #1130 patches, and it seems to work fine. If you are ready to release final packages, you do not need to wait for me to build the entire RC1. I think that all what I'll have to submit will be distro-specific patches, useless for other people. It could wait for next release anyway.
Francois
On 18/09/12 20:50, Slávek Banko wrote:
François, David, all,
After incorporation of patches to change the path to the documentation, the current state of the GIT branches v3.5.13-sru seems to be ready to release 3.5.13.1. Please, are there any other patches that should be included? Errors that should be resolved? Anything else for what should be a release postponed?
Release it now or in the near future and then start working on 3.5.13.2 the next SRU version,
Andrew
On 19 September 2012 04:14, Andrew Young mail@andrewyoung.co.uk wrote:
On 18/09/12 20:50, Slávek Banko wrote:
François, David, all,
After incorporation of patches to change the path to the documentation, the current state of the GIT branches v3.5.13-sru seems to be ready to release 3.5.13.1. Please, are there any other patches that should be included? Errors that should be resolved? Anything else for what should be a release postponed?
Release it now or in the near future and then start working on 3.5.13.2 the next SRU version,
Andrew
To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-devel-unsubscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-devel-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-devel.pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
+1
3.5.13-SRU was huge! so many patches. I would prefer many smaller releases, with maybe 10 or less patches each, in higher frequency, from our stable branch (of course it is all up to you slavek, just offering my input)
Release it now or in the near future and then start working on 3.5.13.2 the next SRU version,
Agreed.
Don't try to get 3.5.13.1 perfect. What exists now for 3.5.13.1 far exceeds the quality of 3.5.13. Push the 3.5.13.1 tarballs.
Additional 3.5.13.x releases make some sense, but I'd rather see time and energy focused on getting R14 out the door. The time and energy devoted to 3.5.13.1 has robbed R14 of forward progress.
Maintaining a stable 3.5.13.x is challenging because of the need to evaluate and test backwards compatibility of every single patch --- 'TQ/tq' transpositional fixes, XDG differences, etc. Those differences won't exist with R14 point releases. The sooner we get R14 out the door the better off we'll be.
3.5.13-SRU was huge! so many patches. I would prefer many smaller releases, with maybe 10 or less patches each, in higher frequency, from our stable branch (of course it is all up to you slavek, just offering my input)
I have been proposing this type of release schedule for a long while.
Darrell
Slávek Banko wrote:
François, David, all,
After incorporation of patches to change the path to the documentation, the current state of the GIT branches v3.5.13-sru seems to be ready to release 3.5.13.1. Please, are there any other patches that should be included? Errors that should be resolved? Anything else for what should be a release postponed?
What about packaging? Did you still manage to check whether libogg0 can be removed from Trinity on Ubuntu? I'd really like to see this solved for the Precise version.
Thanks, Julius
On Saturday 22 of September 2012 15:45:02 Julius Schwartzenberg wrote:
Slávek Banko wrote:
François, David, all,
After incorporation of patches to change the path to the documentation, the current state of the GIT branches v3.5.13-sru seems to be ready to release 3.5.13.1. Please, are there any other patches that should be included? Errors that should be resolved? Anything else for what should be a release postponed?
What about packaging? Did you still manage to check whether libogg0 can be removed from Trinity on Ubuntu? I'd really like to see this solved for the Precise version.
Thanks, Julius
As you could see in another thread this problem are also discussed, but so far no easy solution.
http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/?0::3580 http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/?0::3581
Slavek --
Slávek Banko wrote:
On Saturday 22 of September 2012 15:45:02 Julius Schwartzenberg wrote:
What about packaging? Did you still manage to check whether libogg0 can be removed from Trinity on Ubuntu? I'd really like to see this solved for the Precise version.
As you could see in another thread this problem are also discussed, but so far no easy solution.
http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/?0::3580 http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/?0::3581
Are you sure the library is still needed? What happens when you just remove it from the repository? I understood from Tim that the special Trinity version was needed in the past to compile some packages but it probably wasn't needed anymore.
Julius
On Saturday 22 of September 2012 19:11:12 Julius Schwartzenberg wrote:
Are you sure the library is still needed? What happens when you just remove it from the repository? I understood from Tim that the special Trinity version was needed in the past to compile some packages but it probably wasn't needed anymore.
I'm pretty sure that packages in 3.5.13.x have dependency on libogg-dev-la. When I delete libogg from repository, builds will be not possible. Tim tested in R14, if it is possible to change this dependency to libogg-dev. I do not know the outcome yet.
Slávek --
Dne so 22. září 2012 Julius Schwartzenberg napsal(a):
Are you sure the library is still needed? What happens when you just remove it from the repository? I understood from Tim that the special Trinity version was needed in the past to compile some packages but it probably wasn't needed anymore.
Julius
Well, I rebuild all packages that have been dependent on libogg-dev-la. So now this dependency is no longer needed. Package libogg is already removed from my PPA.
Slávek --
Dne so 22. záÅà 2012 Julius Schwartzenberg napsal(a):
Are you sure the library is still needed? What happens when you just remove it from the repository? I understood from Tim that the special Trinity version was needed in the past to compile some packages but it probably wasn't needed anymore.
Julius
Well, I rebuild all packages that have been dependent on libogg-dev-la. So now this dependency is no longer needed. Package libogg is already removed from my PPA.
Slávek
The remainder of the R14 rebuild test has been running since last night; once it completes without any ogg errors I will remove the hacked ogg package from the main archive as well.
Tim
Hi all,
I do not know if anyone already preparing to announce the release of a new version, but I have prepared a wiki page with a detailed list of changes. The announcement could include a link to this page.
http://www.trinitydesktop.org/wiki/bin/view/Documentation/Releases_3_5_13_1_...
Slavek --
I do not know if anyone already preparing to announce the release of a new version, but I have prepared a wiki page with a detailed list of changes. The announcement could include a link to this page.
http://www.trinitydesktop.org/wiki/bin/view/Documentation/Releases_3_5_13_1_...
Slavek,
Do you know whether these two bugs affect 3.5.13 or 3.5.13.1:
http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1111 http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=178
The bug only affects 32-bit systems.
To test in k3b, select "Burn DVD ISO Image." The dialog will show "No image file selected." There are no problems with CD images.
With kio-iso, in konqueror "right-click" on a DVD ISO image and from the popup menu, select Open With ISO9660 Image Viewer or select Actions ISO9660 View.
These errors do not occur in a 64-bit system, which implies both apps are not being built correctly to read large files.
Darrell
Dne so 22. září 2012 Darrell Anderson napsal(a):
I do not know if anyone already preparing to announce the release of a new version, but I have prepared a wiki page with a detailed list of changes. The announcement could include a link to this page.
http://www.trinitydesktop.org/wiki/bin/view/Documentation/Releases_3_ 5_13_1_Changelog
Slavek,
Do you know whether these two bugs affect 3.5.13 or 3.5.13.1:
http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1111 http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=178
The bug only affects 32-bit systems.
To test in k3b, select "Burn DVD ISO Image." The dialog will show "No image file selected." There are no problems with CD images.
With kio-iso, in konqueror "right-click" on a DVD ISO image and from the popup menu, select Open With ISO9660 Image Viewer or select Actions ISO9660 View.
These errors do not occur in a 64-bit system, which implies both apps are not being built correctly to read large files.
Darrell
Please patch for k3b (in GIT) is well tested and approved? Is patch suitable for inclusion into 3.5.13.1?
Slavek --
-
Andrew Young -
Calvin Morrison -
Darrell Anderson -
Francois Andriot -
François Andriot
-
Jonesy -
Julius Schwartzenberg -
Slávek Banko -
Timothy Pearson