Re: [UrJTAG-dev] time for release 0.11?

[Geert Stappers]

On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 08:42:49AM +, Jiri Kastner wrote:
> for me release is when:
> - it has tag in git
> - is official archive listed in files (in case of sf.net)

Such is done with '2017.10pre1'.

Let the mailinglist know if to proceed with '2017.10'.



Groeten
Geert Stappers
-- 
Leven en laten leven

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
UrJTAG-development mailing list
UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development

Re: [UrJTAG-dev] time for release 0.11? web/

[Geert Stappers]

On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 10:37:30PM +0100, Geert Stappers wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 12:31:09PM +0100, Kolja Waschk wrote:
> > 
> > web/
> > 
> >  - update, build and commit web content
> >  - find out how and where to put the new content online
> > 
> > It has been almost 10 years since I did the latter. Maybe I can dig
> > out how to do at least *that* and help a bit.
>  
> | stappers@paddy:~/src/urjtag-git-sf
> | $ git grep rsync
> | web/Makefile:RSYNC=rsync
> | stappers@paddy:~/src/urjtag-git-sf
> | $ 
> 
> 
> 
> So testdrive with
>  cd web
>  make sync-from-sf
>  # use SF password
> 
> 
> actual web upload is  `make sync-to-sf`

Just tested.
Found out the web/Makefile needed some update, done so.


Groeten
Geert Stappers
-- 
Leven en laten leven

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
UrJTAG-development mailing list
UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development

Re: [UrJTAG-dev] time for release 0.11?

[Kolja Waschk]

Hi


to github" reply, please

Why not?


I've made a number of posts regarding my opinion on this topic in the 
past, no need to repeat.


Although from the posts here it seems desired by many to re-base the 
project somewhere else, there has not been anyone yet who proved really 
willing to actually do the work and maintain it there. You just keep 
writing "move to github", like hitting a button on your remote control 
(and it reaches me as if I'm meant to be the TV set).


For me personally, the move would mean even more effort than I'm willing 
to spend. I thought a release could be easier made at SF.



Someone booked the github.com/urjtag place, and did nothing
with it. Maybe this is intentional, maybe not.


AFAIK that someone was Mike and uses that place "private", so you can 
not see whether it is actually in use or not. I tried to contact him 
last year about it but gave up after getting no replies.


Please go ahead, try to get it, then fill the space there and maintain 
it. Until then, comments like the following simply do not help:


> Better compile it to markdown and have it displayed by github. I don't
> see the strict need to compile to HTML.

The UrJTAG.txt already is markup, but the project is not on github.

Kolja


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
UrJTAG-development mailing list
UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development

Re: [UrJTAG-dev] time for release 0.11?

[Kolja Waschk]

   - find out how and where to put the new content online

> github? with move to github additional advantage should be

This shouldn't have been misunderstood as another trigger for another 
"move to github" reply, please. I just meant who makes the release must 
find out how to put content (documentation compiled into HTML) up on the 
existing, well working server.


Kolja


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
UrJTAG-development mailing list
UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development

Re: [UrJTAG-dev] time for release 0.11? web/

[Geert Stappers]

On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 12:31:09PM +0100, Kolja Waschk wrote:
> >If there are already some notes on doing a release,
> >then please tell the mailinglist(archive) about it.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> work to do that already kept me from "simply releasing" a few times
> because it takes a bit of time and diligence:
> 
> urjtag/
> 
>  - update ChangeLog, NEWS and THANKS
>  - update doc/UrJTAG.txt and README
>  - update version in configure.ac
> 
> web/
> 
>  - update, build and commit web content
>  - find out how and where to put the new content online
> 
> It has been almost 10 years since I did the latter. Maybe I can dig
> out how to do at least *that* and help a bit.
 
| stappers@paddy:~/src/urjtag-git-sf
| $ git pull
| Warning: Permanently added the ECDSA host key for IP address '216.105.38.16' 
to the list of known hosts.
| Password: 
| Already up to date.
| stappers@paddy:~/src/urjtag-git-sf
| $ git grep rsync
| web/Makefile:RSYNC=rsync
| stappers@paddy:~/src/urjtag-git-sf
| $ 



So testdrive with
 cd web
 make sync-from-sf
 # use SF password


actual web upload is  `make sync-to-sf`


> etc..
> 
>  - (TBD) build binaries for download, especially for windows..
> 
> Do NOT make any last-minute functional/build/code changes. Just
> touch documentation for the release.
> 
> The only overall change that I find worth considering at this moment
> is maybe to separate all the handcrafted or compiled chip data
> (urjtag/data content) from the actual UrJTAG code. Especially with
> the "new" ability to read BSDL directly, the data/ lost its
> importance somewhat. This question might be discussed especially by
> the maintainers of urjtag packages for distribution?
> 
> Nb the "urjtag.com" and "urjtag.de" domain registration only lives
> until  the end of this year, but I'll continue to support
> "urjtag.org". If the project is not moved somewhere else where there
> is no webserver for the www. A record, as it is now configured with
> sourceforge.. well, anyway, that is certainly not life-critical for
> the project.



Groeten
Geert Stappers
On wednesday some more time scheduled for it.
-- 
Leven en laten leven

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
UrJTAG-development mailing list
UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development

Re: [UrJTAG-dev] time for release 0.11?

[Jiri Kastner]

On Sun, 04 Mar 2018 12:31:09 +0100, Kolja Waschk wrote:

>> If there are already some notes on doing a release,
>> then please tell the mailinglist(archive) about it.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> work to do that already kept me from "simply releasing" a few times 
> because it takes a bit of time and diligence:
> 
> urjtag/
> 
>   - update ChangeLog, NEWS and THANKS
>   - update doc/UrJTAG.txt and README
>   - update version in configure.ac

btw, version in counfigure.ac reflects svn revision, not git commit

> 
> web/
> 
>   - update, build and commit web content
>   - find out how and where to put the new content online

github? with move to github additional advantage should be
gerrithub.io for code review.

> 
> It has been almost 10 years since I did the latter. Maybe I can dig out 
> how to do at least *that* and help a bit.
> 
> etc..
> 
>   - (TBD) build binaries for download, especially for windows..
> 
> Do NOT make any last-minute functional/build/code changes. Just touch 
> documentation for the release.
> 
> The only overall change that I find worth considering at this moment is 
> maybe to separate all the handcrafted or compiled chip data (urjtag/data 
> content) from the actual UrJTAG code. Especially with the "new" ability 
> to read BSDL directly, the data/ lost its importance somewhat. This 
> question might be discussed especially by the maintainers of urjtag 
> packages for distribution?

that's partial truth - python bindings still looks for 'native' urjtag data.
i haven't seen ability to say in python like in urjtag itself 'bsdl path 
blabla'.


> 
> Nb the "urjtag.com" and "urjtag.de" domain registration only lives until 
>   the end of this year, but I'll continue to support "urjtag.org". If 
> the project is not moved somewhere else where there is no webserver for 
> the www. A record, as it is now configured with sourceforge.. well, 
> anyway, that is certainly not life-critical for the project.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Kolja
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot



--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
UrJTAG-development mailing list
UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development

Re: [UrJTAG-dev] time for release 0.11?

[Geert Stappers]

On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 10:28:17AM +0100, Kolja Waschk wrote:
> >A fork by itself doesn't give you a formal release nor someone who
> >cares for it. If you or someone else wants to jump in here at
> >sourceforge to help it, you're welcome. I'd consider that more
> >desirable.
> 
> Oh, that was unclear from my side. I meant to say *help here at
> sourceforge* is more considerable in my opinion, not forking.
> 
> A fork does NOT magically
> 
>  - bring all documents up to date
>  - make a formal release
>  - integrate more outstanding patches
>  - clean up more outstanding issues
>  - improve code quality
>  - separate chip data from code
>  - separate numerous adapter configs (pinouts) from driver code
> 
> All of which is IMHO required for the main branch to live on,
> wherever it is located.
> 
> In the first place, a *person* is needed.
> 
> If there was a person with intents to do or steer all the above, and
> that *person* wants to move the project somewhere, okay. But moving
> first without anyone who cares better at the destination is no good
> idea.
 
So true.


Some input for a next release:

* Version number that indicates a date.  e.g.  2017.10, 2018.2, 2018.3
* Allow the person doing the release to make mistakes (allow learning)
* Keep notes about how to do a release in the git repository
 
If there are already some notes on doing a release,
then please tell the mailinglist(archive) about it.


> Regards,
> Kolja

Groeten
Geert Stappers
-- 
Leven en laten leven

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
UrJTAG-development mailing list
UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development

Re: [UrJTAG-dev] time for release 0.11?

[Kolja Waschk]

A fork by itself doesn't give you a formal release nor someone who cares 
for it. If you or someone else wants to jump in here at sourceforge to 
help it, you're welcome. I'd consider that more desirable.


Oh, that was unclear from my side. I meant to say *help here at 
sourceforge* is more considerable in my opinion, not forking.


A fork does NOT magically

 - bring all documents up to date
 - make a formal release
 - integrate more outstanding patches
 - clean up more outstanding issues
 - improve code quality
 - separate chip data from code
 - separate numerous adapter configs (pinouts) from driver code

All of which is IMHO required for the main branch to live on, wherever 
it is located.


In the first place, a *person* is needed.

If there was a person with intents to do or steer all the above, and 
that *person* wants to move the project somewhere, okay. But moving 
first without anyone who cares better at the destination is no good idea.


Regards,
Kolja










--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
UrJTAG-development mailing list
UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development

Re: [UrJTAG-dev] time for release 0.11?

[Jiri Kastner]

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 08:42:49 +, Jiri Kastner wrote:
> 
> i'm fine with moving to github/gitlab
> 

...bitbucket, whatever :)


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
UrJTAG-development mailing list
UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development

Re: [UrJTAG-dev] time for release 0.11?

[Jiri Kastner]

for me release is when:
- it has tag in git
- is official archive listed in files (in case of sf.net)

i'm fine with moving to github/gitlab

which related projects? warning in advance to maintainers of those projects
will be enough :)

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 08:42:30 +0100, Kolja Waschk wrote:

> Hi,
> 
>  > there plans to release 0.11 soon?
> 
> What exactly are the (real) requirements to name it a "release" rather 
> than use just a tagged clone/checkout from GIT/SVN?
> 
>> At some point in time, it will be the right time to fork.
> 
> A fork by itself doesn't give you a formal release nor someone who cares 
> for it. If you or someone else wants to jump in here at sourceforge to 
> help it, you're welcome. I'd consider that more desirable.
> 
> Changing the site where it is hosted might help the developers who are 
> better with github, but disturb all the related projects that expect it 
> at sourceforge. It creates quite a lot of rumble but IMHO few benefits. 
> Naturally, a move would help getting rid of all unresolved issues in the 
> tracker at once. Is that wanted?
> 
> Regards,
> Kolja
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot



--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
UrJTAG-development mailing list
UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development

Re: [UrJTAG-dev] time for release 0.11?

[Kolja Waschk]

Hi,

> there plans to release 0.11 soon?

What exactly are the (real) requirements to name it a "release" rather 
than use just a tagged clone/checkout from GIT/SVN?



At some point in time, it will be the right time to fork.


A fork by itself doesn't give you a formal release nor someone who cares 
for it. If you or someone else wants to jump in here at sourceforge to 
help it, you're welcome. I'd consider that more desirable.


Changing the site where it is hosted might help the developers who are 
better with github, but disturb all the related projects that expect it 
at sourceforge. It creates quite a lot of rumble but IMHO few benefits. 
Naturally, a move would help getting rid of all unresolved issues in the 
tracker at once. Is that wanted?


Regards,
Kolja




--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
UrJTAG-development mailing list
UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development

Re: [UrJTAG-dev] time for release 0.11?

[Benjamin Henrion]

On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 9:30 PM, Jiri Kastner  wrote:
> hi all,
> i'm maintainer of urjtag in fedora, i see 500+ commits since 0.10,
> are there plans to release 0.11 soon?
> and some roadmap?

At some point in time, it will be the right time to fork.

-- 
Benjamin Henrion (zoobab)
Email: zoobab at gmail.com
Mobile: +32-484-566109
Web: http://www.zoobab.com
FFII.org Brussels
"In July 2005, after several failed attempts to legalise software
patents in Europe, the patent establishment changed its strategy.
Instead of explicitly seeking to sanction the patentability of
software, they are now seeking to create a central European patent
court, which would establish and enforce patentability rules in their
favor, without any possibility of correction by competing courts or
democratically elected legislators."

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
UrJTAG-development mailing list
UrJTAG-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development