From: William Z. <wrz...@po...> - 2011-09-08 10:10:58
|
I'd like to call for a focused effort to build a new release within no more than a few weeks. Things that are clear and simple and can be done within a few days should be wrapped up so we can release. If you're working on bigger things (like a whole new synth driver) and you expect to take a few weeks, then we'll hold that back for 0.22. Note that I don't have permissions to post a binary, so we'll need a volunteer for that. And if you'd prefer to be the one to BUILD the binary, let me know. If you're working on something now, please respond with an estimate of how long it'll take (powers of ten - 1, 10, 100 days). -Bill Zwicky |
From: frankster <jsy...@te...> - 2011-09-08 10:55:46
|
On 09/08/11 11:10, William Zwicky wrote: > If you're working on something now, please respond with an estimate of how > long it'll take (powers of ten - 1, 10, 100 days). > TC Electronic M350 Effect Unit driver, should be ready in about 1 day. frankie |
From: Joe E. <jo...@em...> - 2011-09-08 15:45:21
|
On 9/8/2011 3:10 AM, William Zwicky wrote: > Note that I don't have permissions to post a binary, so we'll need a > volunteer for that. And if you'd prefer to be the one to BUILD the binary, > let me know. I can probably post the binary, but I probably shouldn't build it. I don't use ant or make or any of the tools which use the build.xml and other files which everybody carefully maintains. > If you're working on something now, please respond with an estimate of how > long it'll take (powers of ten - 1, 10, 100 days). Well, while you're talking about releases, I want to mention something else about the refactor (now that I'm diving back into the code and remembering what the hell I was thinking at the time). The *original* refactoring plan was to make "core" go away, entirely. Everything in core was going to get neatly organized into org.jsynthlib somehow. Two things postponed this: - CVS (which is what sourceforge was using at the time) didn't support "moving" files across directories. When they got moved, CVS would treat them as one file being deleted and another, unrelated one being added. This would affect people's ability to see diffs between versions on either side of the date when the file was moved. SVN, I'm told, *does* support moving, so it's my hope that this will preserve the revision history when the files get moved. - When I saw how many synthdrivers and other UI components were subclassing Actions.MenuFrame, I freaked and decided to un-tangle that mess... which is what I'm just finishing up now. If I move files around while I'm working in branches/UIRefactor, then that's going to create chaos when we try to merge this into trunk. So, I'm not going to move any existing files until *after* the merge to trunk, but they *will* move after that and everything will look a lot cleaner. - Joe |
From: frankster <jsy...@te...> - 2011-09-08 15:59:45
|
On 09/08/11 16:44, Joe Emenaker wrote: > SVN, I'm told, *does* > support moving, so it's my hope that this will preserve the revision > history when the files get moved. svn mv core/X org/jsynthlib/X > - When I saw how many synthdrivers and other UI components were > subclassing Actions.MenuFrame, I freaked and decided to un-tangle that > mess... which is what I'm just finishing up now. > > If I move files around while I'm working in branches/UIRefactor, then > that's going to create chaos when we try to merge this into trunk. So, > I'm not going to move any existing files until *after* the merge to > trunk, but they *will* move after that and everything will look a lot > cleaner. sounds good. Do you think the refactoring is a candidate for 0.21 or are you going to hold off for the following release? frankie |
From: Joe E. <jo...@em...> - 2011-09-08 16:09:17
|
On 9/8/2011 8:59 AM, frankster wrote: > On 09/08/11 16:44, Joe Emenaker wrote: >> SVN, I'm told, *does* >> support moving, so it's my hope that this will preserve the revision >> history when the files get moved. > svn mv core/X org/jsynthlib/X Yup. It's just a matter of "svn diff" sees "deeply" through moves, I guess... > Do you think the refactoring is a candidate for 0.21 or are you going > to hold off for the following release? No way for 0.21. A lot of the UI code has been moved around or re-written. I haven't been able to test any of it because it won't even compile from all of the stuff I'm changing. I might have it compiling by the end of today, but I'm anticipating lots of little UI glitches (like, windows not moving to the front when they're supposed to, or not notifying xyz when they're closed, etc) which will require that the refactored build just get used a bit so we can find all of the little things I messed up during the re-write. - Joe |
From: William Z. <wrz...@po...> - 2011-09-09 00:54:14
|
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:59 AM, frankster <jsy...@te...>wrote: > Do you think the refactoring is a candidate for 0.21 or are you going to > hold off for the following release? > I posted a plan a few days ago: 0.21 as soon as possible, 0.22 etc as changes accumulate. Joe's refactor will be released as 0.30. -Bill Zwicky |