[Geany-devel] Plan ahead (to fail to plan is to plan to fail)

[Colomban Wendling]

Le 03/10/2011 06:15, Lex Trotman a écrit :
> Hi All,
> 
> Now we have 0.21 released I thought it was worthwhile looking at the
> path ahead, and since we have the possibility of some quite
> significant changes, maybe starting a plan of attack so that not too
> much effort is wasted.
> 
> The big things I see right now that have had some work are:
> 
> 1. change to DVCS and hosting, and possible changes to process that
> forces/enables (to my mind the process issues are more important than
> the DVCS itself)

Yep -- though I think I'm missing something ti your sentence... I don't
get the meaning of "and possible changes to process that forces/enables"

> 2. change to Glade 3 (entails GTK change)
> 
> 3. support for GTK3 (needs above and might entail a further GTK change)
> 
> 4. support for plugins in non-C, non-compiled languages (as full
> plugins, and the VM/interpretor as a plugin itself so core doesn't
> need to be changed to add more languages)
> 
> 5. session support (has been sitting in a branch for a while)
> 
> 6. patches in the queue (some are getting a bit old)
> 
> 7. bugfixes

Seems reasonable as future plans, not sure all would fit in a single
release... well, we'll see how fast things goes anyway :)

> 
> 8. call it 1.0

Or 1.22, it's what is in SVN now.

> roughly from the most disruptive to least disruptive.
> 
> Then there are all the bright new things that will inevitably come up :)
> 
> My main suggestion is that it would be best to do the change to the
> VCS first, then it won't disrupt the other things.  And get the
> process bedded down (stable branch, develop branch, version branches
> ...) and call that 1.0.

Agreed with the strong branching scheme,
http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ feels good to me.

> And then other disruptive things can then be done in repository forks
> so they don't get too much in each others way.

And/or feature-branches ;)

> Beyond that its up to individuals which they work on and when, Geany
> is an open source project after all.
> 
> So I suggest that we decide DVCS and host (Git, Github?) and follow
> the recipe developed in the ML as soon as possible.  And then announce
> the change, and the new processes.

Agreed.


Cheers,
Colomban