Re: ANNOUNCE: Terminal Server Client 0.124

[Kjartan Maraas <kmaraas broadpark no>]

ons, 17.09.2003 kl. 20.46 skrev Bill Haneman:
> Erick:
> 
> There's an O'Reilly pocket CVS reference, it's been all I've ever
> needed.  40 or 50 tiny pages, well organized, and even easier/more
> explicit than 'man cvs'.
> 
Even so I think Erick's suggestion is a good one. We need to get stuff
like how to:

- branch
- tag for releases
- add ChangeLog markers
- upload tarballs
- other strange GNOMEisms

into a document and up on d.g.o IMO

Cheers
Kjartan

> - Bill
> 
> On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 19:34, Erick Woods wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, 2003-09-17 at 18:30, Erick Woods wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > > > 
> > > yeah, cvs is needed, but it's easy:
> > > 
> > > http://developer.gnome.org/tools/cvs.html
> > 
> > Nice, but inadequate.  It shows me how to check stuff out, but I will need 
> > to know how to commit changes, branch the code and stuff like that, right?  
> > Remember, I am short on time and don't want to waste a lot of it learning 
> > new things right now.  a list of commands/tutorial for commits, etc. like 
> > the checkout stuff listed there would be a great addition.
> > 
> > > one of the biggest advantages on having it in GNOME CVS is that you'll
> > > get far more translations from the GNOME Translation team.
> > 
> > That would be nice.
> > 
> > > in gnome-network we detect the programs at run-time, at least in some
> > > cases, for not having to depend on them. But we still depend on some
> > > things, like, iirc, *vncviewer. So it's ok to me if we depend on
> > > rdesktop, at least from a packaging point of view.
> > 
> > tsclient detects things at runtime, too.  It disables options for clients 
> > that are unavailable.  i have the dep on rdesktop because it was designed 
> > for that and because it would be foolish to install it and not have at 
> > least one protocol enabled.
> > 
> > > it looks ok to me as it is. Of course, there are sure things to
> > > fix/change, but I dont think a UI restructure is needed at all.
> > 
> > That's good.  There have been folks (I won't name them) that have insisted 
> > on major changes to the UI and some of them have really been abrasive.  
> > Not cool, but it wasn't you, so I won't say anymore.
> > 
> > > hmm, what were those changes to make it HIG-compliant that you dont want
> > > to do?
> > 
> > Most of those changes are complete.  The big one that is not is that 
> > someone insisted that all the little images and banner image at the top be 
> > removed for HIG compliance.  That is pure crap and isn't going to happen.  
> > One other change that will likely happen before I do another release is to 
> > scrap the compact/full mode stuff and just use the full mode.  The compact 
> > mode is useless with protocols other than rdp and is slightly incomplete 
> > and flakey.  It would be a lot better for maintainability to scrap the 
> > compact mode and I plan on doing that.  Other than that, the code isn't 
> > the greatest, but it is pretty clean and stable.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Erick Woods
> > erick gnomepro com
> > http://www.gnomepro.com/
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnome-hackers mailing list
> > gnome-hackers gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-hackers mailing list
> gnome-hackers gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers
> 
_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers