Hi, Just wondering about some things for plugins in the geany-plugins release. (This doesn't apply for any plugins in SVN that aren't part of the release).
Should there be a common minimum version for GTK/GLib? I think this might be a good idea.
Also for small obvious fixes to plugins (e.g. to get them to build), should we just commit them ourselves rather than going through the maintainer (that might be too busy to respond for a while)?
Another thing is whether we have a common NEWS file for the release. I think we should; it could be updated by each plugin author with any notable changes. Chow or someone else/me could have the right to edit/remove anything in it if it's too big or unclear.
Regards, Nick
Hi,
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 12:12:42 +0100 Nick Treleaven nick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
Just wondering about some things for plugins in the geany-plugins release. (This doesn't apply for any plugins in SVN that aren't part of the release).
Should there be a common minimum version for GTK/GLib? I think this might be a good idea.
I agree. Should be the same as Geany's in my opinion.
Also for small obvious fixes to plugins (e.g. to get them to build), should we just commit them ourselves rather than going through the maintainer (that might be too busy to respond for a while)?
Its hard to say where to stop as some fixes will need some more than changing two line
Another thing is whether we have a common NEWS file for the release. I think we should; it could be updated by each plugin author with any notable changes. Chow or someone else/me could have the right to edit/remove anything in it if it's too big or unclear.
I agree.
cheers, Frank
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 14:05:45 +0200, Frank wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 12:12:42 +0100 Nick Treleaven nick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
Just wondering about some things for plugins in the geany-plugins release. (This doesn't apply for any plugins in SVN that aren't part of the release).
Should there be a common minimum version for GTK/GLib? I think this might be a good idea.
I agree. Should be the same as Geany's in my opinion.
Yes, please.
Also for small obvious fixes to plugins (e.g. to get them to build), should we just commit them ourselves rather than going through the maintainer (that might be too busy to respond for a while)?
Its hard to say where to stop as some fixes will need some more than changing two line
I'm a bit puzzled about this. Basically I think it should be ok to patch some trivial things like the currently broken build of the codenav plugin which uses too new GLib functions (which is in this case very easy to fix, as mentioned in another thread on this list). OTOH, I also like the idea of independent modules which are completely in the responsibility of the maintainer. But of course, this doesn't make much sense when the maintainers disappear. So, I'm not really clear about this. Maybe it is indeed better to fix rather easy or otherwise important things (like GTK 2.8 compatibility if we want to go for it).
Another thing is whether we have a common NEWS file for the release. I think we should; it could be updated by each plugin author with any notable changes. Chow or someone else/me could have the right to edit/remove anything in it if it's too big or unclear.
Yes, yes, yes. We should also have a README in the geany-plugins root directory. It should contain some _basic_ information about the included plugins, build instructions (maybe it could reference to README.waf and something similar for autotools should be written) and contact informaton. IIRC I already suggested this to Chow when we created the geany-plugins combined release infrastructure but maybe I missed it.
Regards, Enrico
Enrico Tröger schrieb:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 14:05:45 +0200, Frank wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 12:12:42 +0100 Nick Treleaven nick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
Just wondering about some things for plugins in the geany-plugins release. (This doesn't apply for any plugins in SVN that aren't part of the release).
Should there be a common minimum version for GTK/GLib? I think this might be a good idea.
I agree. Should be the same as Geany's in my opinion.
Yes, please.
I don't think the main Geany app should force plugin writers on any GTK/GLib version. It should be possible for the author/maintainer to use newer versions if he thinks the new functions make it easier for him to maintain it, or if they make the plugin better or something.
But that all doesn't work since the plugins are combined to a single package. They should built together, which basically implies a minimum GTK/GLib version. I think it doesn't necessarily have to be the minimum versions Geany uses.
Also for small obvious fixes to plugins (e.g. to get them to build), should we just commit them ourselves rather than going through the maintainer (that might be too busy to respond for a while)?
Its hard to say where to stop as some fixes will need some more than changing two line
I'm a bit puzzled about this. Basically I think it should be ok to patch some trivial things like the currently broken build of the codenav plugin which uses too new GLib functions (which is in this case very easy to fix, as mentioned in another thread on this list). OTOH, I also like the idea of independent modules which are completely in the responsibility of the maintainer. But of course, this doesn't make much sense when the maintainers disappear. So, I'm not really clear about this. Maybe it is indeed better to fix rather easy or otherwise important things (like GTK 2.8 compatibility if we want to go for it).
I'm definitely with Nick here
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 13:36:26 +0200 Thomas Martitz thomas.martitz@student.HTW-Berlin.de wrote:
Enrico Tröger schrieb:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 14:05:45 +0200, Frank wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 12:12:42 +0100 Nick Treleaven nick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
Just wondering about some things for plugins in the geany-plugins release. (This doesn't apply for any plugins in SVN that aren't part of the release).
Should there be a common minimum version for GTK/GLib? I think this might be a good idea.
I agree. Should be the same as Geany's in my opinion.
Yes, please.
I don't think the main Geany app should force plugin writers on any GTK/GLib version. It should be possible for the author/maintainer to use newer versions if he thinks the new functions make it easier for him to maintain it, or if they make the plugin better or something.
But that all doesn't work since the plugins are combined to a single package. They should built together, which basically implies a minimum GTK/GLib version. I think it doesn't necessarily have to be the minimum versions Geany uses.
I'm afraid this might will cause some more confusion on user's side as he e.g. can compile Geany on its outdate Debian/Fedora/foo but cannot build the plugins.
Cheers, Frank
On 07.09.2009 20:40, Frank Lanitz wrote:
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 13:36:26 +0200 Thomas Martitzthomas.martitz@student.HTW-Berlin.de wrote:
Enrico Tröger schrieb:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 14:05:45 +0200, Frank wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 12:12:42 +0100 Nick Treleavennick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
Just wondering about some things for plugins in the geany-plugins release. (This doesn't apply for any plugins in SVN that aren't part of the release).
Should there be a common minimum version for GTK/GLib? I think this might be a good idea.
I agree. Should be the same as Geany's in my opinion.
Yes, please.
I don't think the main Geany app should force plugin writers on any GTK/GLib version. It should be possible for the author/maintainer to use newer versions if he thinks the new functions make it easier for him to maintain it, or if they make the plugin better or something.
But that all doesn't work since the plugins are combined to a single package. They should built together, which basically implies a minimum GTK/GLib version. I think it doesn't necessarily have to be the minimum versions Geany uses.
I'm afraid this might will cause some more confusion on user's side as he e.g. can compile Geany on its outdate Debian/Fedora/foo but cannot build the plugins.
Cheers, Frank
You mean if he didn't realize that geany and geany-plugins are separate software (suites)?
Best regards.
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 20:44:15 +0200 Thomas Martitz thomas.martitz@student.HTW-Berlin.de wrote:
On 07.09.2009 20:40, Frank Lanitz wrote:
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 13:36:26 +0200 Thomas Martitzthomas.martitz@student.HTW-Berlin.de wrote:
Enrico Tröger schrieb:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 14:05:45 +0200, Frank wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 12:12:42 +0100 Nick Treleavennick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
Just wondering about some things for plugins in the geany-plugins release. (This doesn't apply for any plugins in SVN that aren't part of the release).
Should there be a common minimum version for GTK/GLib? I think this might be a good idea.
I agree. Should be the same as Geany's in my opinion.
Yes, please.
I don't think the main Geany app should force plugin writers on any GTK/GLib version. It should be possible for the author/maintainer to use newer versions if he thinks the new functions make it easier for him to maintain it, or if they make the plugin better or something.
But that all doesn't work since the plugins are combined to a single package. They should built together, which basically implies a minimum GTK/GLib version. I think it doesn't necessarily have to be the minimum versions Geany uses.
I'm afraid this might will cause some more confusion on user's side as he e.g. can compile Geany on its outdate Debian/Fedora/foo but cannot build the plugins.
Cheers, Frank
You mean if he didn't realize that geany and geany-plugins are separate software (suites)?
Yes. From my thinking, the user is not seeing a big difference between this both.
Cheers, Frank
On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 21:04:06 +0200, Frank wrote:
I don't think the main Geany app should force plugin writers on any GTK/GLib version. It should be possible for the author/maintainer to use newer versions if he thinks the new functions make it easier for him to maintain it, or if they make the plugin better or something.
But that all doesn't work since the plugins are combined to a single package. They should built together, which basically implies a minimum GTK/GLib version. I think it doesn't necessarily have to be the minimum versions Geany uses.
I'm afraid this might will cause some more confusion on user's side as he e.g. can compile Geany on its outdate Debian/Fedora/foo but cannot build the plugins.
You mean if he didn't realize that geany and geany-plugins are separate software (suites)?
Yes. From my thinking, the user is not seeing a big difference between this both.
IMHO, the user *should* not see a big difference in the dependencies of both suites. At least not as long as we can easily prevent it. I think for the combined plugins release, the most easy and intuitive way for all people (users and developers) is to stick with Geany's minimum requirements.
Regards, Enrico
On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 23:48:34 +0200 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
IMHO, the user *should* not see a big difference in the dependencies of both suites. At least not as long as we can easily prevent it. I think for the combined plugins release, the most easy and intuitive way for all people (users and developers) is to stick with Geany's minimum requirements.
I agree. Usually it's quite easy to still support GLib/GTK 2.8.
Regards, Nick
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 12:12:42 +0100 Nick Treleaven nick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
Another thing is whether we have a common NEWS file for the release. I think we should; it could be updated by each plugin author with any notable changes. Chow or someone else/me could have the right to edit/remove anything in it if it's too big or unclear.
Just added a NEWS file with entries for 0.17 & 0.17.1 to trunk.
Regards, Nick
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 17:12:26 +0100, Nick wrote:
On Thu, 3 Sep 2009 12:12:42 +0100 Nick Treleaven nick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
Another thing is whether we have a common NEWS file for the release. I think we should; it could be updated by each plugin author with any notable changes. Chow or someone else/me could have the right to edit/remove anything in it if it's too big or unclear.
Just added a NEWS file with entries for 0.17 & 0.17.1 to trunk.
Great!
Regards, Enrico