Hi folks,
I saw that the SM-branch is merged with trunk on a regular basis, but not sure what's the current status of that branch. Can someone help me out there?
Cheers, Frank
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:02:48 +0200 Frank Lanitz frank@frank.uvena.de wrote:
Hi folks,
I saw that the SM-branch is merged with trunk on a regular basis, but not sure what's the current status of that branch. Can someone help me out there?
Cheers, Frank
Hi Frank.
Well, I periodically merge trunk into SM branch, because
- I use SM branch myself and, at the same time, I want to try new features which become available in Geany; - the more often you perform the merge, the easier it is to resolve conflicts (which occur rather often because SM contains many changes).
The status of the branch is a hard question :) This branch contains
- session management support; - minor improvements in project handling etc.; - some experiments like frequent saving of recent file list to the file, so that no recent files are lost when several Geany instances are running side by side.
Now
- a better session management support is implemented by Dimitar (if a decision is made to include session management in Geany, I'd prefer this implementation to be chosen); - experiments should not go to trunk in any case.
So, the only useful thing in SM branch is the minor improvements. Even if someone has time to discuss them and decide to include them in trunk, it may be rather hard to cleanly extract the necessary patches from SM so that they apply to trunk.
Best regards, Eugene.
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 11:31:21 +0400 Eugene Arshinov earshinov@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:02:48 +0200 Frank Lanitz frank@frank.uvena.de wrote:
Hi folks,
I saw that the SM-branch is merged with trunk on a regular basis, but not sure what's the current status of that branch. Can someone help me out there?
Cheers, Frank
Hi Frank.
Well, I periodically merge trunk into SM branch, because
- I use SM branch myself and, at the same time, I want to try new features which become available in Geany;
- the more often you perform the merge, the easier it is to resolve conflicts (which occur rather often because SM contains many
changes).
The status of the branch is a hard question :) This branch contains
- session management support;
- minor improvements in project handling etc.;
- some experiments like frequent saving of recent file list to the file, so that no recent files are lost when several Geany instances are running side by side.
Now
- a better session management support is implemented by Dimitar (if a decision is made to include session management in Geany, I'd prefer this implementation to be chosen);
- experiments should not go to trunk in any case.
So, the only useful thing in SM branch is the minor improvements. Even if someone has time to discuss them and decide to include them in trunk, it may be rather hard to cleanly extract the necessary patches from SM so that they apply to trunk.
Well, not sure and just a thought. Would it be possible to extract the little improvements so they could be merged to trunk? Can you give a more detailed view on the et? What do the improvements include?
Cheers, Frank
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 20:31:06 +0200 Frank Lanitz frank@frank.uvena.de wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 11:31:21 +0400 Eugene Arshinov earshinov@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
So, the only useful thing in SM branch is the minor improvements. Even if someone has time to discuss them and decide to include them in trunk, it may be rather hard to cleanly extract the necessary patches from SM so that they apply to trunk.
Well, not sure and just a thought. Would it be possible to extract the little improvements so they could be merged to trunk? Can you give a more detailed view on the et? What do the improvements include?
Cheers, Frank
OK, today I'll review the commit history and post here the list of improvements.
Best regards, Eugene.
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 20:31:06 +0200 Frank Lanitz frank@frank.uvena.de wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 11:31:21 +0400 Eugene Arshinov earshinov@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
So, the only useful thing in SM branch is the minor improvements. Even if someone has time to discuss them and decide to include them in trunk, it may be rather hard to cleanly extract the necessary patches from SM so that they apply to trunk.
Well, not sure and just a thought. Would it be possible to extract the little improvements so they could be merged to trunk? Can you give a more detailed view on the et? What do the improvements include?
Hi Frank.
Recently I posted pull request #34 that fixed opening project in an already running project. It's already accepted and closed. Now it seems to me that was the last meaningful (though, very tiny) change from SM that could be useful in trunk.
There are another changes in SM. They can be rather easily viewed by cloning my SM repository [1] and running `git log` command [2]. For convenience, I attached the output to this message.
You see, there are many changes, but many of them were caused by what my SM implementation demanded (and that's a serious drawback of my implementation as opposed to the version created by Dimitar).
For example, in my SM --new-instance implies --no-session -- that was done particularly in order to make my SM restore "new instances" properly. I believe, nobody wants such changes to land into trunk. Another example, since in my implementation several instances could write user's geany.conf simultaneously, I included into SM a patch that offered locking of that file (created by Lex, afair).
Well, I think I explained pretty much of it. If I accidently find another little change that could be useful in trunk, I'll just create another pull request for it, especially because it's very convenient on Github.
There is actually a little change that indeed could be useful, "Use absolute paths to project file names" (commit de9d440). But I'm not sure, why it was necessary and why I wrote it…
[1]: https://github.com/earshinov/geany/tree/sm [2]: git log --first-parent --pretty='tformat:%h %ad %d %s' af8c11f^..sm
-- Best regards, Eugene.