Re: Bugs in 0.96 (was Re: 0.96(pre-9) crashes on Windows when insereting a line before ...)

[Lars Clausen <lars raeder dk>]

On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 08:55 +0200, Hans Breuer wrote:
> On 28.03.2007 22:36, Lars Clausen wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 13:00 +0200, Christian Muenscher wrote:
> > > Dear List!
> > >
> > > Today I downloaded the 0.96-pre9 for Windows. Installation worked fine on WinXP SP2 german. But I 
> > > discovered a reproducible crash:
> > >
> > > - Place a shape that can contain text on a new diagram
> > > - Enter one line of text
> > > - Move the cursor to the beginning of this line of text
> > > - Press Enter
> > > -> crash
> > >
> > > I know that 0.96 is out, but since the chances between 0.96-pre9 and 0.96 seem irrelevant, I fear that 
> > > this crash also made it into the final version. Am I the only one experiencing this problem? Another one 
> > > coming right after this one here...
> >
> > Sometimes I wonder why I even bother with the prereleases.  
> Me too ;-) May I suggest to at least slowdown (preview|bugfix) releases
> enough that there is some more time to find, report and fix bugs?

You mean three months isn't enough?  Either we're just unlucky, or
there's just too few people trying the pres to get out to enough
corners.

> > There's *always* serious bugs being found right after release anyway.  I could
> > cut it down to maybe one or two pres, giving a few folks time to make a
> > sanity check, then release and get about the same result.
> >
> > From my experience there will always be one more serious bug, but sometimes
> just documenting it is better than hurrying just another release.

I'm not worried about putting out too many releases, it's the time spent
between them that seems silly.  Steffen and I have releasing down to a
fairly fast process by now, and with the web pages on a wiki, those can
get updated much faster too.  So I'd prefer to have the prereleases be a
sanity check and just deal more with having post-releases while we
develop the next cool thing.

> > Anyway, I have reproduced the bug, it appears to be caused by shapes
> > finding text ascent in old-fashioned ways.  I have a fix for it, but
> > need to make sure I base it off of the right revision from SVN (not too
> > used to SVN yet).
> I did not find any commit of you in
> svn+ssh://svn.gnome.org/svn/dia/branches/dia-0-96
> (naming convention following e.g. gtk+ and gimp pratice, also used for
> dia-0-95)
>
> but there was one in
> svn+ssh://svn.gnome.org/svn/dia/branches/dia_0_96
>
> Should we merge that in dia-0-96 or do we really want to introduce a
> different naming convention?

I was just following the documentation at
http://developer.gnome.org/tools/svn.html -- I didn't know there was a
dia-0-95 branch in SVN (fairly new to SVN still), how do you check what
branches there are?

-Lars