Re: Old versions of GNOME [was: Re: gtk 2.8 for gnome 2.12]

[Luis Villa <luis villa gmail com>]

On 7/22/05, Sri Ramkrishna <sri aracnet com> wrote:
> Seems like the Ubuntu folks are coming up with the solutions anyways.

I (and I expect others) would certainly be displeased if we became
dependent on a proprietary tool to manage our bugs or release process.
As long as it isn't open, launchpad is not a solution, no matter how
nice it is. If it is open (and the UI continues to improve) I expect
I'll likely be one of the first to push us away from bugzilla and
towards malone.

> Also note that some of the problem might be that CVS might make it hard
> to do.

Agreed with this one- we must move to bzr, svk, or something in that
vein to make the branching part of this manageable over the long term.
Or rather, we don't *have* to, but I don't envy the poor soul who
tries to do it with CVS.

Luis

> On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 00:22 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
> > On 7/22/05, Glynn Foster <Glynn Foster sun com> wrote:
> > > Heya,
> > >
> > > > Please bear with me along the following rant.
> > >
> > > Okay, so this rant covers a lot of ground, but I have specific comments
> > > from a Sun perspective -
> > >
> > > o As a Sun developer, I'd much rather the community focus on
> > >   churning out the next release of GNOME. Which is pretty much what
> > >   the average hacker wants to do, right - be innovative, develop
> > >   new features and generally get the desktop moving forward. Bug fixing
> > >   gets boring, and bug fixing on stable branches even more so ;)
> > >
> > > o I think it should be up to the various distributions to put their
> > >   bug fixing patches upstream, and onto the branches ASAP - so that
> > >   other distributions can also use them. Let's face it - there's
> > >   no value add in bug fixes, and if they don't get pushed upstream,
> > >   it makes GNOME look bad rather than other distributions. I'd
> > >   very much welcome a 'free for all' on the stable branches, past
> > >   the 2 or 3 official releases we do.
> >
> >
> > Once upon a time Nat and I talked about having a centrally
> > located/funded coordinator for the distros, known to be reasonably
> > neutral, whose job it was to track bugs[1] in older versions, test
> > patches against multiple versions, etc.- basically do the
> > coordination/testing/release work that would solve some of the
> > problems Federico  very correctly highlighted. I still think it would
> > likely be a good investment for the distros (who will all soon
> > maintain multiple old versions that none of the developers want to
> > touch) to pool some money and hire such a person.
> >
> > [1] At the time (right after the glow of 2.0) I was interested; most
> > definitely am not these days, though I'd certainly lend my advice on
> > the bug-tracking side.
> >
> > > o I'm trying to push a change in development process within Sun, so
> > >   that we can concentrate our core development on HEAD as much as
> > >   possible. We've been kicking this around internally for the past
> > >   couple of years, and now with our focus on OpenSolaris, I think it
> > >   should be more feasible to do than previously. As an added bonus,
> > >   we hope to be able to throw QA resources into that as well. All
> > >   this is going to take time though, and won't happen overnight.
> >
> > I have seen that mentioned in some blogs, and I agree it would be
> > great to see- I hope it works out.
> >
> > Luis
> > _______________________________________________
> > desktop-devel-list mailing list
> > desktop-devel-list gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
> 
>