GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 583464
2.11.0 blockers
Last modified: 2009-08-03 23:02:43 UTC
This shows the 2.11.0 blockers, as far as I am concerned. Paolo may have other issues in mind, too. - Mike
Perhaps http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=575553 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=529080 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=505578 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=490247 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=474940 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=474915 quite annoying http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=448585 too
None of those are really blockers, that absolutely must be fixed before 2.11.x. It would be very nice to fix them, of course, but we shouldn't hold up a release for them. - Mike
I think http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=448585 could be fixed before 2.11.x It lets the user quite confused and could provoke errors, because every application mantains selection after a rename.
Mike, As I understand you personally don't see any showstoopers, right ? And Paolo neither so far ? So nothing is stopping the 2.11.x release ? Cheers, Matthias
Matthias, No, sadly that's not correct. The blockers are listed below, in the "depends on" field. You can also click on the "dependency tree": http://bugzilla.gnome.org/showdependencytree.cgi?id=583464 I've been working on the gio/gfile migration, personally. That is nearing completion. Also, Paolo Bacchilega (not to be confused with donpaolo) had some plans for 2.11.x (like plug-ins), but I don't know if they will block or not. - Mike
Ok thanks, I didn't look carefully I'll try to contribute in any of them if I can. Cheers, Matthias
I wanto to install gthumb from trunk in ubuntu. I'm trying with the following instruction Mike gave me: git clone git://git.gnome.org/gthumb cd gthumb ./autogen.sh --prefix=/usr CFLAGS="-ggdb" make sudo make install I already "sudo apt-get build-dep gthumb", but at the end of autoget I get: checking for GTHUMB... configure: error: Package requirements ( glib-2.0 >= 2.6.0 gthread-2.0 gmodule-2.0 gtk+-2.0 >= 2.14.0 libgnome-2.0 >= 2.6.0 libgnomeui-2.0 >= 2.6.0 libgnomecanvas-2.0 >= 2.6.0 libbonobo-2.0 >= 2.6.0 libbonoboui-2.0 >= 2.6.0 bonobo-activation-2.0 >= 2.6.0 gio-2.0 >= 2.16.1 gnome-vfs-2.0 >= 2.6.0 gnome-vfs-module-2.0 exiv2 >= 0.18 libxml-2.0 >= 2.4.0 libglade-2.0 >= 2.4.0) were not met: No package 'exiv2' found I have exiv2 installed, and "sudo apt-get build-dep exiv2" too. What do I lack in order to compile gthumb?
Hi, You should probably install libexiv2-dev Marc
ok, now all is ok, thank you!
I completed the installation, but I see that it replaced my current ubuntu gthumb install. How do I install it in such a way that I can run both jaunty and trunk gthumb?
change the prefix at autogen step, e.g.: ./autogen.sh --prefix=/opt
donpaolo, Little remark: are you going to add every new bug you report to this blocker list? I don't think they all qualify as blockers, we should keep the real blockers. Maybe propose the bugs to be added for review before adding them "blindly". (Or I missed a parallel discussion... is the ML already setup and I missed it?) My 2 cents. Cheers, Matthias
No, I'm not adding every new bug I submit. I think I'm evaluating the real blockers. However, if it's better I can simply suggest to add it them as blockers.
It may be nice to keep this bug to track real blockers and to open a new one to list "nice to have" bugs/features for 2.11 release. Marc
Just to be clear, blockers should only be: 1. Bugs that represent major architectural changes (gio migration, comment / tag / metadata integration) 2. Things that are completely, embarrassingly broken (slideshow fading, tiff saving) 3. Issues that have been raised many times in bugzilla (selection weirdness after directory change) 4. Removing deprecated code. Don't worry, Paolo! Your bug reports are much appreciated and they do get read! They just aren't blockers. We need to keep the blocker list short and focused, so that we have some hope of making a 2.11.0 release. This is my attempt at "good management" :-) Perhaps when the mailing list is up we could have a "bug of the week" to fix the long list of issues that Paolo is so good at identifying. - Mike
ok, let me avoid mark bugs as blockers. But explain me this: what is 2.11.0 intended to be? - a working-although-carrying-significative-bugs release - a pre-release for testing purpose in order to prepare to 2.12 release - a developers-only release - ... Perhaps I lacked some explication when 2.11 was planned.
ok, let me avoid marking bugs as blockers. But explain me this: what is 2.11.0 intended to be? - a working-although-carrying-significative-bugs release - a pre-release for testing purpose in order to prepare to 2.12 release - a developers-only release - ... Perhaps I lacked some explication when 2.11 was planned.
(excuse my double comment...)
[quote] Perhaps I lacked some explication when 2.11 was planned. [/quote] That's the key point: there's no such info (or at least it's not public). It's in Paolo B. and/or Mike's head ;-) Mike we need the ML fast ! ;-)
I have requested the mailing list, but the gnome sysadmin team is usually slow. Generally, the even series (2.10.x) have been stable branches where only bug fixes are allowed, and new features are not allowed. Odd series (2.11.x) have been unstable, and new features are allowed. All releases should be working, usable, and crash-free. All releases have minor bugs. That's my view, anyway. - Mike
It would be helpful if someone could look at bug 583891 - rotation progress bar is broken. - Mike
*** Bug 584695 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Paolo has rebased the gthumb code in the new "ext" branch. 2.11.x will come from this new branch. The current master branch is dead, so I'm closing this tracker bug; it is no longer relevant. See the mailing list for details. - Mike