Menu
▾
▴
ruby-gnome2-devel-en
|
From: Kouhei S. <ko...@co...> - 2008-03-11 12:16:34
|
Hi,
The Ruby-GNOME2 project lacks human resources. For example,
we doesn't release new version since 2006-12-29 even if we
keep developing.
We want a release manager who will do the following work:
* You will try to build on supported platform that will be
decided by you.
(e.g. ruby >= 1.8.x, GTK+ >= 2.x.x, Linux, FreeBSD,
Windows, MacOSX, ...)
Some people who aren't a release manager but they have a
supported platform will help you.
* You will archive a new Ruby-GNOME2 package.
* You will release the archived package on SF.net.
(I have a release script for SF.net. It may help you.
https://cutter.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/cutter/trunk/misc/release.rb)
* You will announce the release on SF.net and related MLs.
e.g.: http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/231656
* You will do the same work again after a few months ago.
We are waiting for your help!
Thanks,
--
kou
|
|
From: Joachim G. <rub...@an...> - 2008-03-11 18:45:54
|
Hi, I would like to participate. > The Ruby-GNOME2 project lacks human resources. For example, > we doesn't release new version since 2006-12-29 even if we > keep developing. Yes, it's a shame. Also I think the bindings are pretty stable now and maybe the version 0.16 may not "describe" the actual progress. > We want a release manager who will do the following work: > > * You will try to build on supported platform that will be > decided by you. > (e.g. ruby >= 1.8.x, GTK+ >= 2.x.x, Linux, FreeBSD, > Windows, MacOSX, ...) I have a i386 ubuntu linux machine here. How do you test all the bindings ? Are there any automated tests available? Sure I can test it with all the applications I have and use, but they surely will not test every feature. > * You will archive a new Ruby-GNOME2 package. Does it include precompiled binaries? The thing I don't have here is a Windows machine. Anyone else would need to do binary packages for win32. Best Regards, Joachim Glauche -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. |
|
From: Mikael H. <mi...@im...> - 2008-03-11 22:44:43
|
11 mar 2008 kl. 23.31 skrev Detlef Reichl: Hi, Glad to see this discussion come up. I'm relatively new to Ruby-Gnome2 but a long time contributer and maintainer on various GNOME modules. I'm a bit curious as to whether it wouldn't make sense to move the infrastructure over to the GNOME/GTK+ infrastructure? This will bring the project closer to the rest of the community, as well as make it easier to get involved in the project if you are already a GNOME/GTK+ contributor. As far as I know all of the successful bindings are hosted on GNOME Subversion server, in GNOME Bugzilla, release tarballs on the GNOME FTP etc. I would personally be happy to assist in any way to make this happen as well as try building on both Linux and Mac OS X (Intel and PPC). Cheers and thanks to everyone who have brought the bindings to the current level, your work is much appreciated. Mikael Hallendal >>> The Ruby-GNOME2 project lacks human resources. For example, >>> we doesn't release new version since 2006-12-29 even if we >>> keep developing. > > Jep, I also thought about this... From my point of view, we should > release (at least) tar balls every six month. Even if we couldn't > follow > the Gtk+ / GNOME release cycles with complete bindings, this will be a > good sign for the packagers of the destributions to release new > packages > and to the "normal user" it will show, that ruby-gnome is still alive. > >> Yes, it's a shame. >> Also I think the bindings are pretty stable now and maybe the version >> 0.16 may not "describe" the actual progress. >> >>> We want a release manager who will do the following work: >>> >>> * You will try to build on supported platform that will be >>> decided by you. >>> (e.g. ruby >= 1.8.x, GTK+ >= 2.x.x, Linux, FreeBSD, >>> Windows, MacOSX, ...) >> I have a i386 ubuntu linux machine here. >> > I have a PowerPc debian and an i386 debian setup here. For his i could > set up a build- and test bot. But... > >> How do you test all the bindings ? Are there any automated tests >> available? > > ...this is a big problem. There is no testframework at all. I'm not > that > much an expert in this, but i think that a _usefull_ testframework > is at > least as much work than the bindings itself. > > > >> Sure I can test it with all the applications I have and use, >> but they surely will not test every feature. >> >>> * You will archive a new Ruby-GNOME2 package. > > IMHO that is not a special need. Cause SF does not make any backups > (at > least they tell so) someone has to make regularey backups from _all_ > data. > > > Cheers detlef > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ > ruby-gnome2-devel-en mailing list > rub...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ruby-gnome2-devel-en -- Imendio AB, http://www.imendio.com |
|
From: Pascal T. <pt...@li...> - 2008-03-12 14:05:43
|
On mer, 2008-03-12 at 22:50 +0900, Kouhei Sutou wrote: > Hi, > > In <750...@im...> > "Re: [ruby-gnome2-devel-en] Release manager" on Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:44:25 +0100, > Mikael Hallendal <mi...@im...> wrote: > > > I'm a bit curious as to whether it wouldn't make sense to move the > > infrastructure over to the GNOME/GTK+ infrastructure? > > > > This will bring the project closer to the rest of the community, as > > well as make it easier to get involved in the project if you are > > already a GNOME/GTK+ contributor. As far as I know all of the > > successful bindings are hosted on GNOME Subversion server, in GNOME > > Bugzilla, release tarballs on the GNOME FTP etc. > > It's OK for me. If other contributors prefer it, we will > move to there. I'm not really a contributor given that I don't even remember my last commit, but I think it would be nice to get closer to GNOME, and it would give visibility > # But applying an account for GNOME infrastructure is a bit > # bother for me... It's supposed to be easier now http://blogs.gnome.org/ovitters/2007/09/29/mango-gone-live/ |
|
From: Kouhei S. <ko...@co...> - 2008-03-15 02:16:31
|
Hi, In <1205330733.8213.23.camel@plop> "Re: [ruby-gnome2-devel-en] Release manager" on Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:05:33 +0100, Pascal Terjan <pt...@li...> wrote: > > # But applying an account for GNOME infrastructure is a bit > > # bother for me... > > It's supposed to be easier now > http://blogs.gnome.org/ovitters/2007/09/29/mango-gone-live/ I knew that. I want to use 'kou' for account name because it's my account name that I always use. But I can't use that. (Yes, this is a small problem.) Thanks, -- kou |
|
From: Mikael H. <mi...@im...> - 2008-03-12 14:08:19
|
12 mar 2008 kl. 14.50 skrev Kouhei Sutou: Hi, > Hi, > > In <750...@im...> > "Re: [ruby-gnome2-devel-en] Release manager" on Tue, 11 Mar 2008 > 23:44:25 +0100, > Mikael Hallendal <mi...@im...> wrote: > >> I'm a bit curious as to whether it wouldn't make sense to move the >> infrastructure over to the GNOME/GTK+ infrastructure? >> >> This will bring the project closer to the rest of the community, as >> well as make it easier to get involved in the project if you are >> already a GNOME/GTK+ contributor. As far as I know all of the >> successful bindings are hosted on GNOME Subversion server, in GNOME >> Bugzilla, release tarballs on the GNOME FTP etc. > > It's OK for me. If other contributors prefer it, we will > move to there. Wonderful, I got some pings yesterday in #gnome-ruby2 and on Jabber from people who liked the idea. > # But applying an account for GNOME infrastructure is a bit > # bother for me... I can help with getting accounts sorted out for people who need them. And hopefully (as Pascal wrote in a reply), things are working better these days. Cheers, Mikael Hallendal -- Imendio AB, http://www.imendio.com |
|
From: Mikael H. <mi...@im...> - 2008-03-22 12:08:51
|
15 mar 2008 kl. 03.20 skrev Kouhei Sutou Hi, Sorry for slow reply, was traveling during the week. > Hi, > > In <734...@im...> > "Re: [ruby-gnome2-devel-en] Release manager" on Wed, 12 Mar 2008 > 15:08:01 +0100, > Mikael Hallendal <mi...@im...> wrote: > >>>> I'm a bit curious as to whether it wouldn't make sense to move the >>>> infrastructure over to the GNOME/GTK+ infrastructure? >>>> >>>> This will bring the project closer to the rest of the community, as >>>> well as make it easier to get involved in the project if you are >>>> already a GNOME/GTK+ contributor. As far as I know all of the >>>> successful bindings are hosted on GNOME Subversion server, in GNOME >>>> Bugzilla, release tarballs on the GNOME FTP etc. >>> >>> It's OK for me. If other contributors prefer it, we will >>> move to there. >> >> Wonderful, I got some pings yesterday in #gnome-ruby2 and on Jabber >> from people who liked the idea. > > Is there any auto-build support on the GNOME infrastructure? I'm not sure if there are but I can't recall I've seen that, it might be possible to setup though. >>> # But applying an account for GNOME infrastructure is a bit >>> # bother for me... >> >> I can help with getting accounts sorted out for people who need them. >> And hopefully (as Pascal wrote in a reply), things are working better >> these days. > > Thanks. > If we decide to move to the GNOME infrastructure, could you > help the Ruby-GNOME2 subversion repository migration? I can definitely help get the right people involved, I don't have the admin rights to do the job myself though. Cheers, Micke -- Imendio AB, http://www.imendio.com |
|
From: Kouhei S. <ko...@co...> - 2008-03-23 10:12:02
|
Hi, In <F10...@im...> "Re: [ruby-gnome2-devel-en] Release manager" on Sat, 22 Mar 2008 13:07:25 +0100, Mikael Hallendal <mi...@im...> wrote: > Sorry for slow reply, was traveling during the week. No problem. > > Is there any auto-build support on the GNOME infrastructure? > > I'm not sure if there are but I can't recall I've seen that, it might > be possible to setup though. Ruby-GNOME2 supports some GTK+ versions. If we can check building with all supported version, it will be very useful. > > If we decide to move to the GNOME infrastructure, could you > > help the Ruby-GNOME2 subversion repository migration? > > I can definitely help get the right people involved, I don't have the > admin rights to do the job myself though. OK. Thanks! -- kou |
|
From: Kouhei S. <ko...@co...> - 2008-03-15 02:20:21
|
Hi, In <734...@im...> "Re: [ruby-gnome2-devel-en] Release manager" on Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:08:01 +0100, Mikael Hallendal <mi...@im...> wrote: > >> I'm a bit curious as to whether it wouldn't make sense to move the > >> infrastructure over to the GNOME/GTK+ infrastructure? > >> > >> This will bring the project closer to the rest of the community, as > >> well as make it easier to get involved in the project if you are > >> already a GNOME/GTK+ contributor. As far as I know all of the > >> successful bindings are hosted on GNOME Subversion server, in GNOME > >> Bugzilla, release tarballs on the GNOME FTP etc. > > > > It's OK for me. If other contributors prefer it, we will > > move to there. > > Wonderful, I got some pings yesterday in #gnome-ruby2 and on Jabber > from people who liked the idea. Is there any auto-build support on the GNOME infrastructure? > > # But applying an account for GNOME infrastructure is a bit > > # bother for me... > > I can help with getting accounts sorted out for people who need them. > And hopefully (as Pascal wrote in a reply), things are working better > these days. Thanks. If we decide to move to the GNOME infrastructure, could you help the Ruby-GNOME2 subversion repository migration? -- kou |
|
From: Shin g. W. <rub...@an...> - 2008-03-12 01:30:51
|
Joachim Glauche wrote: > Does it include precompiled binaries? The thing I don't have here is a > Windows machine. Anyone else would need to do binary packages for win32. > > Best Regards, > Joachim Glauche Well, this is too bad for me. I am a windows user but I don't have VC6 compiler to build the binary. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. |
|
From: Kouhei S. <ko...@co...> - 2008-03-12 13:50:48
|
Hi, In <750...@im...> "Re: [ruby-gnome2-devel-en] Release manager" on Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:44:25 +0100, Mikael Hallendal <mi...@im...> wrote: > I'm a bit curious as to whether it wouldn't make sense to move the > infrastructure over to the GNOME/GTK+ infrastructure? > > This will bring the project closer to the rest of the community, as > well as make it easier to get involved in the project if you are > already a GNOME/GTK+ contributor. As far as I know all of the > successful bindings are hosted on GNOME Subversion server, in GNOME > Bugzilla, release tarballs on the GNOME FTP etc. It's OK for me. If other contributors prefer it, we will move to there. # But applying an account for GNOME infrastructure is a bit # bother for me... > I would personally be happy to assist in any way to make this happen > as well as try building on both Linux and Mac OS X (Intel and PPC). It will be very helpful. Thanks, -- kou |
|
From: Detlef R. <det...@gm...> - 2008-03-11 22:32:11
|
> > The Ruby-GNOME2 project lacks human resources. For example, > > we doesn't release new version since 2006-12-29 even if we > > keep developing. Jep, I also thought about this... From my point of view, we should release (at least) tar balls every six month. Even if we couldn't follow the Gtk+ / GNOME release cycles with complete bindings, this will be a good sign for the packagers of the destributions to release new packages and to the "normal user" it will show, that ruby-gnome is still alive. > Yes, it's a shame. > Also I think the bindings are pretty stable now and maybe the version > 0.16 may not "describe" the actual progress. > > > We want a release manager who will do the following work: > > > > * You will try to build on supported platform that will be > > decided by you. > > (e.g. ruby >= 1.8.x, GTK+ >= 2.x.x, Linux, FreeBSD, > > Windows, MacOSX, ...) > I have a i386 ubuntu linux machine here. > I have a PowerPc debian and an i386 debian setup here. For his i could set up a build- and test bot. But... > How do you test all the bindings ? Are there any automated tests > available? ...this is a big problem. There is no testframework at all. I'm not that much an expert in this, but i think that a _usefull_ testframework is at least as much work than the bindings itself. > Sure I can test it with all the applications I have and use, > but they surely will not test every feature. > > > * You will archive a new Ruby-GNOME2 package. IMHO that is not a special need. Cause SF does not make any backups (at least they tell so) someone has to make regularey backups from _all_ data. Cheers detlef |
|
From: Kouhei S. <ko...@co...> - 2008-03-12 13:42:13
|
Hi, In <1205274719.3141.15.camel@datengrab> "Re: [ruby-gnome2-devel-en] Release manager" on Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:31:59 +0100, Detlef Reichl <det...@gm...> wrote: > > > * You will archive a new Ruby-GNOME2 package. > > IMHO that is not a special need. Cause SF does not make any backups (at > least they tell so) someone has to make regularey backups from _all_ > data. I just wanted to say about making .tar.gz, .zip, .exe and so on. Thanks, -- kou |
|
From: Joachim G. <rub...@an...> - 2008-03-11 22:44:01
|
Detlef Reichl wrote: >> Sure I can test it with all the applications I have and use, >> but they surely will not test every feature. >> >> > * You will archive a new Ruby-GNOME2 package. > > IMHO that is not a special need. Cause SF does not make any backups (at > least they tell so) someone has to make regularey backups from _all_ > data. I think what he meant with this is: - check out a specific svn version - put new version number on it - make a tarball out of it (=archive a new package) -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. |
|
From: Detlef R. <det...@gm...> - 2008-03-11 22:47:04
|
Am Dienstag, den 11.03.2008, 23:43 +0100 schrieb Joachim Glauche: > Detlef Reichl wrote: > > >> Sure I can test it with all the applications I have and use, > >> but they surely will not test every feature. > >> > >> > * You will archive a new Ruby-GNOME2 package. > > > > IMHO that is not a special need. Cause SF does not make any backups (at > > least they tell so) someone has to make regularey backups from _all_ > > data. > > I think what he meant with this is: > - check out a specific svn version > - put new version number on it > - make a tarball out of it (=archive a new package) For this is no need. For packages just put a tag onto the svn branch and that was it. |
|
From: Kouhei S. <ko...@co...> - 2008-03-12 13:40:49
|
Hi, In <d5e...@ru...> "Re: [ruby-gnome2-devel-en] Release manager" on Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:45:42 +0100, Joachim Glauche <rub...@an...> wrote: > I would like to participate. Thanks for your help! I'll give you some rights on SF.net. Could you tell me your SF.net account? > How do you test all the bindings ? Are there any automated tests > available? Sure I can test it with all the applications I have and use, > but they surely will not test every feature. No but I want to add some automated tests. Sample programs will also help you. > > * You will archive a new Ruby-GNOME2 package. > Does it include precompiled binaries? The thing I don't have here is a > Windows machine. Anyone else would need to do binary packages for win32. It will be desired on Windows. Thanks, -- kou |
|
From: Joachim G. <rub...@an...> - 2008-03-12 14:52:52
|
Kouhei Sutou wrote: > Thanks for your help! > I'll give you some rights on SF.net. Could you tell me your > SF.net account? My account name is 'jglauche' > It's OK for me. If other contributors prefer it, we will > move to there. fine by me. >> How do you test all the bindings ? Are there any automated tests >> available? Sure I can test it with all the applications I have and use, >> but they surely will not test every feature. > > No but I want to add some automated tests. Sample programs > will also help you. Sounds good. I have a bunch of programs which can be used for "reality" testing also. But a more extended automated test platform would be very very helpful. Is there anyone who can help me on the win32 binaries? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. |
|
From: Joachim G. <rub...@an...> - 2008-03-12 21:04:33
|
Kouhei Sutou wrote: > At least, the next release (soon?) will be done on SF.net. Is there any pending work in current trunk? (r2843) If not, I can release the 0.17.0, at least the source-releases shortly. Seems to work fine for me. Kouhei, will it be possible for you and the main dev team to keep News file in trunk with the most important/summarized news updated? I could parse all the Changelog files and put them into the news file, but the that'll gonna be huge amount of changes since last release. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. |
|
From: Joachim G. <rub...@an...> - 2008-03-14 14:07:35
|
Kouhei Sutou wrote: > And some important bug fixes and new features will be found > in ChangeLog. I hope that you include contributer names of > the next release in NEWS. It's very important. Yes, no problem. Just if you do something big, write in what is done and the contributor name into NEWS file and commit it. I think it's less work than searching all the Changelog files for big changes upon every release. Those changes are all made by you or other contributors? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. |
|
From: Detlef R. <det...@gm...> - 2008-03-14 14:15:53
|
Am Freitag, den 14.03.2008, 22:28 +0900 schrieb Kouhei Sutou: > (* Ruby/GStreamer: Worked with GStreamer >= 0.10.x but doesn't > completed yet.) Does this mean, that GStreamer is now a part of RubyGnome again? If so: nice! Cheers, detlef |
|
From: Kouhei S. <ko...@co...> - 2008-03-14 14:42:20
|
Hi, In <1205504139.13720.29.camel@datengrab> "Re: [ruby-gnome2-devel-en] Release manager" on Fri, 14 Mar 2008 15:15:39 +0100, Detlef Reichl <det...@gm...> wrote: > > (* Ruby/GStreamer: Worked with GStreamer >= 0.10.x but doesn't > > completed yet.) > > Does this mean, that GStreamer is now a part of RubyGnome again? If so: > nice! It will be true but it may not be true in the next release. Because it's not completed yet, the release manager may decide that the next release doesn't include it. Thanks, -- kou |
|
From: Sjoerd S. <sj...@lu...> - 2008-03-25 11:57:21
|
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 10:28:44PM +0900, Kouhei Sutou wrote: > (* Ruby/GStreamer: Worked with GStreamer >= 0.10.x but doesn't > completed yet.) I just checked out the new ruby-gnome2 from SVN to see what my bindings needed to change to work with them.. Only to discover that suddenly and completely seperate from my ruby-gstreamer0.10 bindings the Ruby/GStreamer stuff has been updated to 0.10... This is a big WASTE of effort. It seems they have mostly redone the work i already did a few years ago. Now i don't really care if other people waste their time, but i don't like to waste my time on doing the same things as others. Having two seperate gstreamer 0.10 bindings is just ridicoulous and stupid. Not only is it bad for users (2 bindings, which one should be used). It again wastes developer effort (which we're already short on), and the new updated bindings are likely to repeat bugs that i've fixed a long time ago in mine. I had a quick look in the source and i can easily point out various issues that i fixed a long time ago. IMHO we should get the two efforts merged ASAP (There should be only ever have been one effort in the first place, but oh well).. What was the rationale of doings this anyways, i'm pretty sure people know about my bindings. And i'd hope the ruby-gnome2 team doesn't have NIH syndrome. Now i've initially done my bindings outside of the main tree because of various reasons discussed a long long time ago. The main reason for that still exists, i think it's very bad from a release management pov. that all the modules are tied together. Releasing everything as seperate lean packages has the advantage of making releases much easier to do and much less effort for distributions. Unless that's changed my opinion will stay the same: I think that it is in the gstreamer bindings best interest to keep seperate from the main bunch. If we can change to a more sane releases and release everything as seperate package, i'm happy to merge my bindings back into the main repository. In which case i guess i'll just have to live with the sf's horrible bugtracking system (unless we move to gnome, hint hint). If not, then oh well, that's live. but we should stop wasting eachothers time by doing the same work and find some middleground to get stuff merged. Very much unamused, Sjoerd -- The function of the expert is not to be more right than other people, but to be wrong for more sophisticated reasons. -- Dr. David Butler, British psephologist |
|
From: Sjoerd S. <sj...@lu...> - 2008-03-25 15:06:37
|
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:17:45PM +0900, Kouhei Sutou wrote: > Hi, > > In <200...@sp...> > "Re: [ruby-gnome2-devel-en] Release manager" on Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:57:12 +0100, > Sjoerd Simons <sj...@lu...> wrote: > > > IMHO we should get the two efforts merged ASAP (There should be only ever > > have been one effort in the first place, but oh well).. What was the > > rationale of > > doings this anyways, i'm pretty sure people know about my bindings. And i'd > > hope the ruby-gnome2 team doesn't have NIH syndrome. > > NIH syndrome? > I tried to contribute your bindings (not the bindings in the > Ruby-GNOME2 repository) and submitted a patch two years > ago. But the patch was derelict until two days ago. So I > understood your bindings are not maintained. This is the > reason why I started to updated Ruby/GStreamer. I haven't had a lot of time for them that's true and i never made a lot of time because there weren't big issues with them. Otoh still you could have asked me about my plans first before starting a new effort (i would have been very happy to give you svn access). And even that is not so bad, but you really should have pulled my bindings into the repository instead of ignoring everything i already did. And thus set yourself up to hit the same issues that are already fixed in my bindings. I can already tell you that the in the current state Ruby/Gstreamer will get deadlocks and potentially crashes if used for anything but a non-trivial program. ruby-gstreamer0.10 might be undermaintained, but at least it's a stable base to build upon. > > If we can change to a more sane releases and release everything as seperate > > package, i'm happy to merge my bindings back into the main repository. > > If you want to release it as a separate package, you can do. I'm interested in what your ideas are here. Does this mean you agree with not including Ruby/Gstreamer in ruby-gnome2 release but have it go seperate. Or do include it in the big ruby-gnome2 release, but also allow it to seperate releases inbetween ? > But Ruby/GStreamer may depend on unreleased Ruby/GLib. It shouldn't be a big problem to have Ruby/Gstreamer and/or ruby-gstreamer0.10 always working with the last release version of Ruby/GLib... Sjoerd -- The biggest difference between time and space is that you can't reuse time. -- Merrick Furst |
|
From: Sjoerd S. <sj...@lu...> - 2008-03-26 12:19:27
|
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 08:21:04PM +0900, Kouhei Sutou wrote: > Hi, > > In <200...@sp...> > "Re: [ruby-gnome2-devel-en] Release manager" on Tue, 25 Mar 2008 16:06:26 +0100, > Sjoerd Simons <sj...@lu...> wrote: > > > have pulled my bindings into the repository instead of ignoring everything i > > already did. > > Your bindings have several problems to use in the > Ruby-GNOME2 Project Team: Non-consistent coding style, It's moving over to my own coding style, but that's easy to change back to the ``ruby-gnome2'' coding style as needed. Is there a document describing what this style exactly is ? (Exept for the emacs style file) > low Ruby/GLib integration (e.g. rbgst_new_gstobject) Hmm, exactly the same function is in your gstreamer bindings and afaik stems from the original 0.8 bindings. I don't see why this means low integration. > Ruby-GNOME2 Project's naming convention and so on. Because of the gst010 name or ? That was basically there to allow parallel installability of the 0.8 and 0.10 bindings. It seems that most of these things are style issues though and not fundamental issues with the implemtation. > > And thus set yourself up to hit the same issues that are > > already fixed in my bindings. I can already tell you that the > > in the current state Ruby/Gstreamer will get deadlocks and potentially > > crashes if used for anything but a non-trivial program. > Please tell us them. I didn't do a full comparison but some of the things i noticed: * The bin_add doesn't take into account that the bin takes over ownership if GstObjects are floating. * You expose gst_object_sink to the ruby layers, which your really not supposed too. As soon as you wrap an GstObject you should take ownership and sink any floating object (which also solves the previous issue). And crashes with playbin which basically behaves like a bin. * You don't cope with the fact that state changes to a ``lower'' state are synchronous (the call will block), but to change state several ruby callbacks might be called. Which won't work as your in a blocking gst_element_set_state call. Hence your program will deadlock. And i'm sure there will be more if i go in for a closer look. > And please tell us a feature list that your bindings has > but ours doesn't have. Actually tested and working in non-trivial programs is the main feature. Gstreamer is somewhat more complex then most other things (mostly because its heavy use of threads and the way ruby (doesn't) handle them), you can't naively bind it and expect things to work. > > > > If we can change to a more sane releases and release everything as > > > > seperate package, i'm happy to merge my bindings back into the main > > > > repository. > > > > > > If you want to release it as a separate package, you can do. > > > > I'm interested in what your ideas are here. Does this mean you agree with > > not including Ruby/Gstreamer in ruby-gnome2 release but have it go > > seperate. Or do include it in the big ruby-gnome2 release, but also allow > > it to seperate releases inbetween ? > > I prefer to the later if Joachim says OK. > > Ruby/GStreamer's version number will be like the followings: > > * 0.17.0: with Ruby-GNOME2 0.17.0 release > * 0.17.1: separated release. It will depend on Ruby/GLib 0.17.0. > * 0.17.2: separated release. It will depend on Ruby/GLib 0.17.0. > * ... > * 0.18.0: with Ruby-GNOME2 0.18.0 release > * 0.18.1: separated release. It will depend on Ruby/GLib 0.18.0. > * 0.18.2: separated release. It will depend on Ruby/GLib 0.18.0. > * ... I think that makes sense. What i'd like to see if we do things this way. Is that say 0.17.0 is both released as one big tarball and a set of smaller ones. For distributions (like say Debian) it would be great to have one source tarball per component instead of the big blob with everything. Let's see what Joachim thinks about this all :) I'll see if i can get a few hours this weekend to create a set of patches to merge my binding into yours. I still think you've wasted a lot of effort by doing things this way, but it's more important to have one good solid set of gstreamer bindings then two different ones just because the maintainers can't work out their differences :) For now, please hold the Ruby-Gnome2 0.17.0 release (with gstreamer) untill these issues are resolved. Or release 0.17.0 without gstreamer and have a seperate gstreamer 0.17.1 release later on. I don't think it's benificial for anyone to have a release of Ruby/Gstreamer in its current state. Sjoerd -- "I gained nothing at all from Supreme Enlightenment, and for that very reason it is called Supreme Enlightenment." -- Gotama Buddha |
|
From: Joachim G. <rub...@an...> - 2008-03-26 12:55:42
|
Sjoerd Simons wrote: >> * 0.18.2: separated release. It will depend on Ruby/GLib 0.18.0. >> * ... > > I think that makes sense. What i'd like to see if we do things this way. > Is > that say 0.17.0 is both released as one big tarball and a set of smaller > ones. > For distributions (like say Debian) it would be great to have one source > tarball per component instead of the big blob with everything. Let's see > what > Joachim thinks about this all :) Write a script which does something like that for debian packages if you want. But releasing every single component as source tarball doesn't make any sense. Installing Ruby-Gnome would be like "sorry, you need to download this tarball in order to continue" all the time. What could be done is to separate core packages and additional packages. But not 24 packages. > For now, please hold the Ruby-Gnome2 0.17.0 release (with gstreamer) > untill > these issues are resolved. Or release 0.17.0 without gstreamer and have > a > seperate gstreamer 0.17.1 release later on. I don't think it's > benificial for > anyone to have a release of Ruby/Gstreamer in its current state. I really would like to release 0.17 soon. But I'll wait to make my decision if and which version to release until you guys finally come to a conclusion which code base to work on with. Please don't let this take too long. Thanks, Joachim -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. |
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X