Re: [Banshee-List] A song and dance about GSoC 2012

[Alexander Kojevnikov <alexk gnome org>]

On 7 February 2012 21:06, gnomeuser gmail com <gnomeuser gmail com> wrote:
> 2012/2/7 olivier dufour <olivier duff gmail com>:
>> The bof is really a great document but not sure that data is up to date.
>> Some taks are finished and some are not applicable (Gobject introspection
>> have a lot of GIR Parser (andrea, mike and alan have create a such tool) but
>> none is used currently because it will bring regression because the current
>> parser is better than gir file).
>
> I am aware of this, however I have no write access to update it to
> reflect a more current state.
>
> The issues with gir are well known, it is though the direction GNOME
> is going and with it GStreamer and friends. It seems that upstream gir
> are fairly unwilling to consider the needs of .NET/Java/Vala and so
> on.   Some kind of clusterfuck is likely to come from this.
>
> I've seen Mono catch a lot of blame and badmouthing for not using gir,
> it might be good if we could get a post out explaining the exact
> problems and upstreams status on this issues.
>
>> Mono.Upnp and Mono.DBus need some work before release.
>> I know that there is some change in garuma DBUS github which is not merged
>> in main branch.
>
> dbus-sharp has not seen a lot of movement and I know that there are
> fixes in gurama's repo that will allow us to remove some workarounds
> in Banshee. Is there any way to bribe him with beer till he merges
> what is done (I also believe Bertrand might have some changes I recall
> him working on unit tests at the hackfest which I never got
> confirmation was merged to master).
>
> upnp I think Andres or was it Alexander.. can't recall stepped up to
> do a release after the previous maintainer Scott passed away last
> December. I guess that puts this in the marginally safe category.

It was me. It's going slower than I'd prefer, but there's some
progress (see the mono/mono-upnp repo).

>
> I convinced shana to do webkit binding and finishing the port in
> Banshee but she seems to have disappeared despite promises of cookies.
> I guess that means we need another volunteer.
>
> As for the SQL task, I think that still has merit, however it sounds
> like an invasive change and something that would take great
> understanding of Banshee and SQLite. I suspect it might make a good
> GSoC task if we could find a mentor for it.
>
>> I guess we can order that in an excel file with priority/difficulty of the
>> task.
>
> We really should consolidate this more, I wanted to do something like
> the LibreOffice easy hacks page to list all the requested features and
> fixes marked GNOME love. I never got around to it though, I will put
> it on the todo list, I might have some time to dedicate to it
> throughout February.
>
>> we have new items here:
>> http://live.gnome.org/Banshee/Roadmap
>>
>> But to be honest I prefer that we pick a big task such as one of
>> enhancement:
>> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced;bug_severity=enhancement;bug_status=UNCONFIRMED;bug_status=NEW;product=banshee
>
> Just a couple of those seems GSoC scale to me, such as adding support
> for Spotify. It sounds like you have something more specific in mind.
>
>> than a lot of small task because objective wsill be not clear.
>
> I'd really love someone to work on OS X support, we have a lot of
> integration work to do. The BCE part of Banshee isn't even built with
> our OS X image (yet, it is something I am looking at getting working).
> There is little hardware support. Banshee on OS X reeks of potential
> but it needs some love to get truly impressive. That sadly is going to
> be a bunch of small tasks, but it will amount to a big job.
>
> - David
>
>> Olivier Dufour
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:52 PM, olivier dufour <olivier duff gmail com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> XWT is not enough mature. A lot of things in not in XWT currently.
>>> We will lost some important features because banshee use a lot of custom
>>> widget.
>>>
>>> I have talk to luis this weekend and it need a gtk3 backend.
>>> I offer my help for that but I need time for that.
>>>
>>> For me the issue is not gtk3 backend but the lack of maturity and the
>>> regression we will get with it...
>>>
>>> Olivier Dufour
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Andres G. Aragoneses <knocte gmail com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 02/06/2012 05:08 PM, gnomeuser gmail com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Porting relevant parts of the Banshee interface to XWT.
>>>>> https://github.com/mono/xwt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would advice against doing this, first because it is no small task, and
>>>> second and most importantly: AFAIK xwt only has a Gtk# 2.x backend in Linux
>>>> (not Gtk# 3.x).
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>>        Andres
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> banshee-list mailing list
>>>> banshee-list gnome org
>>>> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/banshee-list  (unsubscribe here)
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> banshee-list mailing list
>> banshee-list gnome org
>> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/banshee-list  (unsubscribe here)
> _______________________________________________
> banshee-list mailing list
> banshee-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/banshee-list  (unsubscribe here)