Re: Request for pango freeze break



On Mon, 2004-09-13 at 11:28, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Mon, 2004-09-13 at 10:51, Murray Cumming wrote:
> >> Standard questions:
> >>
> >> 1. Is this a regression, compare to GNOME 2.6?
> >
> > No. (It was a GNOME-2.4 => GNOME-2.6 regression.)
> 
> This is a mark against it. It suggests that it's not that serious.

Well, Pango-1.4.0 was a lot more broken for CJK font selection
than this (it was close to unusable), so I'm not sure anybody
would have noticed. But yes, it's not a crasher, but rather 
an safef-fix I've gotten various bug reports on.

> >> 2. How much has this been tested, to watch out for general horrible
> >> brokenness elsewhere?
> >
> > Not a lot,
> 
> Another mark against it. I trust your judgement, but I don't see a
> compelling reason to take even a small risk with such a fundamentally
> important part of GNOME at the last minute.

Well, it will just mean that I'll do a 1.6.1 very shortly, with this
change (and probably some much more intrusive changes) and people
will use that instead of whatever was in the "official" GNOME-2.8.

But since I said I'd stick to the GNOME release process, I'm not
going to put it in without getting release team approval.

Regards,
					Owen

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]