All,
I have put a significant amount of work into the QuickBuild system over
the past week in an attempt to stabilize it and increase performance.
While I am aware that there were some outages in random components (most
notably the PPA mirror redirects) while I was doing this, all issues
should be resolved at this point.
As of this writing four build machines are online, one for each
architecture. As we have reached the chiller fund goal (see prior
messages) the remaining x86/amd64 build machines will be brought back
online over the next couple weeks.
Please let me know what you think, and definitely let me know if anything
is still malfunctioning!
Tim
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA224
All,
This is a follow-up on point #5 from my post earlier this month entitled
"TDE GIT thaw, build farm status, and future direction".
> Codebase formatting. While this is not a major problem for the users
> I have been tripped up more than once by the fact that some portions of
> the codebase (twin among others) use a vastly different style of
> indentation and bracing, one that is (IMHO) extremely hard to read and/or
> modify. This in turn has therefore contributed to many "fix up prior
> commit" commits and/or outright regressions in GIT. I greatly prefer
> Stroustrup style formatting with hard tab indentation (no space or
> combined space/tab indents) and indented public/protected/private blocks.
> This style is highly legible, emphasizes the control flow, and produces a
> minimal number of non-whitespace difference lines when an if/else block is
> modified. All of the new code (thousands and thousands of lines of it)
> that I have contributed to TDE have been in this style. I have been
> toying with reformatting the entire TDE codebase in one large commit; if
> there are no objections I think this step could greatly improve both our
> development speed and the overall quality of the codebase; comments and
> discussion are welcome.
I would like to start converting over the codebase ASAP. I have an
automated tool that will do this, but would like some feedback on the
style to convert into as reformatting like this is a one-time operation
that will not be repeated for the life of the TDE project.
As mentioned above I strongly prefer a modified Stroustrup style
formatting. Is this acceptable to the other developers, and if not, what
would you rather use and why?
Thanks!
Tim
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
iFYEARELAAYFAlSjHncACgkQLaxZSoRZrGF0owDcDGlmwDw7tQ/jTZc+RPsh9Un8
J/p7Qopfm0FmKADdFWqOHlrmHs6p9sl/aPtWa5F3/Zw2JyoE7G6t1A==
=/kGi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi,
I would like to evaluate the possibility of using TDE R14.0.0 on my PCLinuxOS TDE remaster. Are the PCLInuxOS TDE packages ready?
I would also like if it is possible to still keep the 3.5.13.2 packages until the next TDE release, since they are ultra stable.
Thank you for your hard work on TDE!
-Alexandre
The upgrade from 3.5.13.2 to R14 includes a lot of package
"renames".
After a clean i386 Wheezy 3.5.13.2 install of kde-trinity
is upgraded to R14 RC2, an "apt-get autoremove" removes
48 transitional dummy packages. This is good.
However there are still (roughly) 15 transitional dummy
packages whose descriptions say they can be safely
uninstalled. All that is preventing them from being
uninstalled is two meta packages - kde-trinity and
kde-core-trinity. And so the conscientious sysadmin
removes the two unnecessary meta packages and the
(roughly) 15 remaining transitional dummy packages.
And the next "apt-get autoremove" eats 290 packages
which is most of Trinity.
If you had less than a normal kde-trinity installation
of 3.5.13.2 this problem hits you much sooner and
without uninstalling any meta packages.
What to do? Something in the release notes?
--Mike
Hi,
Some months ago, a discussion about finding a new mascot for TDE has bee going on. Recently, I bought an HP 620lx palmtop (er, Handheld PC, for non-Psion users) and I installed Jornada Linux Mobility Edition, available at jlime.com
I thought that a modified version of their logo could be interesting as a TDE mascot, but I am not sure about the legal aspect of it. Also, what is you opinion on it? I made a quick mockup of what it could be.
Have a great Christmas time!
-Alexandre
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
Tim,
when updating to R14.0.0, after the first login KPersonalizer is run.
I noticed that it still says "R14.0.0 [DEVELOPMENT]", although Control
Center says "R14.0.0" only.
I guess the KPersonalizer package was probably carried over from RC2,
so it still says "development". Any chance you can rebuild the package
with the proper string? After all it is the first thing a new user
would see after the first login.
Cheers
Michele
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=0ktG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi,
I see that many users has problems while installing TDE on Debian/Ubuntu base system. I wonder if it would be a good idea to create, just as DraftSight CAD does, one big package with a typical TDE install. The user could download the .deb file and just install it, without much complications.
-Alexandre
Hi all,
while working on v3.5.13.x was a rule that the patches have always been first
pushed to the master branch and then cherry-picked to v3.5.13-sru branch
(with necessary modifications). Directly to v3.5.13-sru patches were pushed
very rarely - if they were specific to v3.5.13.x. As an example, the current
patch for setting the target release in tdelibs.
I suppose for r14.0.x branch I will not be alone, who will incorporate patches
into this maintenance branch, so I would like to determine, whether we will
work also on r14.0.x branch under these rules?
Michele, what is your opinion?
--
Slávek
