On Nov 12, 2009, at 4:50, Graham Cobb wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 04:29:55PM +0200, Marius Vollmer wrote:
ext Thomas Perl th.p...@gmail.com writes:
The following is a rant about XB-Maemo-Upgrade-Description
with some suggestions for improvement...
Yeah, as soon as I 'invented' it, I
Hello!
The following is a rant about XB-Maemo-Upgrade-Description
with some suggestions for improvement...
Change Log handling (at that time for the downlaod page however ) was
discussed before!
See:
http://www.mail-archive.com/maemo-developers@maemo.org/msg16160.html
--
Gruß...
Tim
2009/11/4 Graham Cobb g+...@cobb.uk.net:
Attila said...
On Wednesday 04 November 2009 10:28:58 Andrew Flegg wrote:
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 09:03, tero.k...@nokia.com wrote:
Two days later I notice a blinking orange light in my status bar. I see
a new version of the application. I
ext Thomas Perl th.p...@gmail.com writes:
The following is a rant about XB-Maemo-Upgrade-Description
with some suggestions for improvement...
Yeah, as soon as I 'invented' it, I could see how it is not going to
work very well. I actually think it is best to ignore this field.
My suggestion
On Nov 11, 2009, at 15:29, Marius Vollmer wrote:
My suggestion is to either use the Debian changelog, or if this sounds
too technical for the end user, agree on some way to mark
user-relevant changes in the Debian changelog (by using USER: as a
prefix for a one-line summary or by having a
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 04:29:55PM +0200, Marius Vollmer wrote:
ext Thomas Perl th.p...@gmail.com writes:
The following is a rant about XB-Maemo-Upgrade-Description
with some suggestions for improvement...
Yeah, as soon as I 'invented' it, I could see how it is not going to
work very
On Nov 4, 2009, at 8:29, Andrew Flegg wrote:
Jeremiah wrote:
On Nov 3, 2009, at 19:25, Tim Teulings wrote:
P.S.: Don't trust my version numbers! Trust my checkbox choice!
That is totally fine with me. I thought a version number was less
intrusive, developers didn't have to do anything,
Andrew Flegg wrote.
Jeremiah wrote:
Shall we put a checkbox by the package promotion page, or somewhere
where we remember, which keeps all accrued karma?
That's probably a good first step, however I wonder if long
term something like Marius suggested might be better:
remaining
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 09:03, tero.k...@nokia.com wrote:
Two days later I notice a blinking orange light in my status bar. I see
a new version of the application. I install, I check what has changed
(minor or major?), I run my tests and thumb it up again.
Aside: how do you check what has
Andrew Flegg wrote:
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 09:03, tero.k...@nokia.com wrote:
Two days later I notice a blinking orange light in my status bar. I
see a new version of the application. I install, I check what has
changed (minor or major?), I run my tests and thumb it up again.
Aside:
On Wednesday 04 November 2009 10:28:58 Andrew Flegg wrote:
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 09:03, tero.k...@nokia.com wrote:
Two days later I notice a blinking orange light in my status bar. I see
a new version of the application. I install, I check what has changed
(minor or major?), I run my
ext Henrik Hedberg wrote:
Tim Teulings wrote:
Except how do you try to prevent abuse (whether intentional or
accidental)? At least with the version number you've got some safety
check (although it is in no way comprehensive). It also requires more
changes at more levels (I bet), so
Voipio Riku (Nokia-D/Helsinki) riku.voi...@nokia.com writes:
Every company has software testers, yet it doesn't mean they dont trust
their developers :)
I think there are two kinds of trust on the table here: trust in
developers not to make mistakes, and trust in developers not to abuse
the
On Nov 4, 2009, at 12:49, Attila Csipa wrote:
On Wednesday 04 November 2009 10:28:58 Andrew Flegg wrote:
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 09:03, tero.k...@nokia.com wrote:
Two days later I notice a blinking orange light in my status bar.
I see
a new version of the application. I install, I check
Attila said...
On Wednesday 04 November 2009 10:28:58 Andrew Flegg wrote:
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 09:03, tero.k...@nokia.com wrote:
Two days later I notice a blinking orange light in my status bar. I see
a new version of the application. I install, I check what has changed
(minor or
On Nov 4, 2009, at 9:21 AM, Graham Cobb wrote:
But the update description does not help with testing: (a) it is
user friendly text, not a developer changelog and (b) the
description is vs. the version already in Extras not vs. the last
extras-testing version.
I'd still love to see a
ext Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com writes:
To beat the horse dead;
foo_1.0-1maemo0 - bug fix - foo_1.0-1maemo1 = All karma retained
foo_1.0-1maemo0 - feature - foo_1.1-1maemo0 = Karma set to zero
Nitpick: 1.0 - 1.1 might well be a bug fix release as well.
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 08:43, Marius Vollmer marius.voll...@nokia.com wrote:
ext Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com writes:
To beat the horse dead;
foo_1.0-1maemo0 - bug fix - foo_1.0-1maemo1 = All karma retained
foo_1.0-1maemo0 - feature - foo_1.1-1maemo0 = Karma set
On Nov 3, 2009, at 12:16, Andrew Flegg wrote:
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 08:43, Marius Vollmer
marius.voll...@nokia.com wrote:
ext Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com writes:
To beat the horse dead;
foo_1.0-1maemo0 - bug fix - foo_1.0-1maemo1 = All karma
retained
On Nov 3, 2009, at 12:16, Andrew Flegg wrote:
Agreed. -maemo0 to -maemo1 is supposed to be a Maemo-specific change
or a packaging change (AIUI). Native packages (such as Hermes,
Attitude etc.) don't have that suffix and use a traditional x.y.z
numbering scheme.
Not necessarily. There is
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 13:58, Henrik Hedberg
henrik.hedb...@innologies.fi wrote:
On Nov 3, 2009, at 12:16, Andrew Flegg wrote:
Agreed. -maemo0 to -maemo1 is supposed to be a Maemo-specific change
or a packaging change (AIUI). Native packages (such as Hermes,
Attitude etc.) don't have that
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote:
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 13:58, Henrik Hedberg
henrik.hedb...@innologies.fi wrote:
On Nov 3, 2009, at 12:16, Andrew Flegg wrote:
Agreed. -maemo0 to -maemo1 is supposed to be a Maemo-specific change
or a packaging change
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 14:34, Frank Banul frank.ba...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote:
Except how do you try to prevent abuse (whether intentional or
accidental)? At least with the version number you've got some safety
check (although it is
Hello!
Except how do you try to prevent abuse (whether intentional or
accidental)? At least with the version number you've got some safety
check (although it is in no way comprehensive). It also requires more
changes at more levels (I bet), so harder to implement.
I think it is time to
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 9:52 PM, Jeremiah Foster jerem...@jeremiahfoster.com
wrote:
snip
And despite various complaints, many are saying that the process will
in fact produce better software. So we are in the right area anyway.
here here.
teething troubles and getting used to a different
On Nov 3, 2009, at 20:36, Henrik Hedberg wrote:
Tim Teulings wrote:
Except how do you try to prevent abuse (whether intentional or
accidental)? At least with the version number you've got some safety
check (although it is in no way comprehensive). It also requires
more
changes at more
Tim Teulings wrote:
Except how do you try to prevent abuse (whether intentional or
accidental)? At least with the version number you've got some safety
check (although it is in no way comprehensive). It also requires more
changes at more levels (I bet), so harder to implement.
I think it
On Nov 3, 2009, at 19:25, Tim Teulings wrote:
P.S.: Don't trust my version numbers! Trust my checkbox choice!
That is totally fine with me. I thought a version number was less
intrusive, developers didn't have to do anything, just remember which
part of their version to change. But as
Jeremiah wrote:
On Nov 3, 2009, at 19:25, Tim Teulings wrote:
P.S.: Don't trust my version numbers! Trust my checkbox choice!
That is totally fine with me. I thought a version number was less
intrusive, developers didn't have to do anything, just remember which
part of their version to
ext Attila Csipa ma...@csipa.in.rs writes:
Yes, there is definitely a sense of throwing out the baby with the bathwater
here - as is, with a sufficiently mature app, NOT applying simple fixes will
get
the app to the user quicker, and applying the fixes will keep the app AWAY
from
the
ext Jeremiah Foster wrote:
On Nov 1, 2009, at 11:02, Henrik Hedberg wrote:
Martin Grimme wrote:
resetting Karma on a new version leads to one very bad issue, IMHO:
Developers of packages with some Karma will hold back bugfix-updates
until the unfixed version has reached extras.
Yup,
surely the system needs to be fixed.
I have some ideas, I don't like some of the ones already proposed, and
of some of them I do like some pieces, but not others and other pieces
could be improved..
But how do we do it ?
Here?
Talk?
Brainstorm?
I once stated that it's the developer that
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 15:03, Aniello Del Sorbo ani...@gmail.com wrote:
But how do we do it ?
Here?
Talk?
Brainstorm?
I'd say we've had more intelligent thought and discussion here than
I'd expect on this topic on talk; and I don't think the
single-threaded nature of brainstorm with the
Aniello Del Sorbo ha scritto:
As Henry did with Mauku, I am doing the same for Xournal. I want it to
extras and then I will release a stupid minor bug fix.
And nothing will make me change my idea.
If there was a button promote to Extras I would have hit it already
and a bug fix would already
I really like Marius' ideas. A mature, high-karma app should be able to push
bugfixes through the system without all the QA hassles of a new, untested
app. Security fixes on high-karma apps should go straight to extras.
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:12 AM, Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote:
I'd say
Alan wrote:
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:12 AM, Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote:
I'd say we've had more intelligent thought and discussion here than
I'd expect on this topic on talk
Grrr!
I hate that kind of talk. It only makes the problem worse.
What problem? This mailing list has a
Your reply continues to sound like the middle class moms who argue for
private schools. How will our children ever get ahead if they go to that
school down the street? It is full of common children who will only slow our
gifted children down.
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Andrew Flegg
On Nov 2, 2009, at 3:07 PM, Qole wrote:
Your reply continues to sound like the middle class moms who argue
for private schools. How will our children ever get ahead if they go
to that school down the street? It is full of common children who
will only slow our gifted children down.
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote:
Alan wrote:
Grrr!
I hate that kind of talk. It only makes the problem worse.
What problem? This mailing list has a higher concentration of
involved (and affected)
On Nov 2, 2009, at 15:42, Riku Voipio wrote:
ext Jeremiah Foster wrote:
On Nov 1, 2009, at 11:02, Henrik Hedberg wrote:
Martin Grimme wrote:
resetting Karma on a new version leads to one very bad issue, IMHO:
Developers of packages with some Karma will hold back bugfix-
updates
Hi Andrew and Atilla,
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Attila Csipa ma...@csipa.in.rs wrote:
On Saturday 31 October 2009 19:43:40 Andrew Flegg wrote:
After working 'til stupid o'clock last night on a new version of Hermes,
today someone's found a bug which'll impact a small number of people.
igor.sto...@nokia.com wrote:
I think the problem here is that some braindead system has been introduced,
which doesn't account for the actual work being done.
And what is the biggest mistake here is that the new system has been
put into production before testing it at all.
Someone
Hi,
resetting Karma on a new version leads to one very bad issue, IMHO:
Developers of packages with some Karma will hold back bugfix-updates
until the unfixed version has reached extras.
This should be avoided.
Martin
2009/11/1, Henrik Hedberg henrik.hedb...@innologies.fi:
Martin Grimme wrote:
resetting Karma on a new version leads to one very bad issue, IMHO:
Developers of packages with some Karma will hold back bugfix-updates
until the unfixed version has reached extras.
Guilty as charged.
I have actually postponed the release of Mauku 2.0 beta 5,
On Nov 1, 2009, at 11:02, Henrik Hedberg wrote:
Martin Grimme wrote:
resetting Karma on a new version leads to one very bad issue, IMHO:
Developers of packages with some Karma will hold back bugfix-updates
until the unfixed version has reached extras.
This is a real problem that will have
Hi,
After working 'til stupid o'clock last night on a new version of Hermes, today
someone's found a bug which'll impact a small number of people. The fix is
trivial.
However, I find myself *not* wanting to fix it as it'll need to go through
another round of testing.
Although the principle
Hi,
2009/10/31 Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org:
Hi,
After working 'til stupid o'clock last night on a new version of Hermes,
today someone's found a bug which'll impact a small number of people. The fix
is trivial.
However, I find myself *not* wanting to fix it as it'll need to go through
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 18:55, Andrea Grandi a.gra...@gmail.com wrote:
By the way, I've upgraded to Hermes 0.2 but I haven't used it yet,
what is the bug you're talking about?
Some Facebook UIDs will now overflow MAXINT, and so I need to store it
in gconf as a long, rather than an int.
Hi,
I just threw away 5 karma to make some changes (but I think
worthwhile). I think the idea is that when there's many more users, 10
silly karma points will be nothing. Until then, have faith, or
something like that. :)
Frank
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 19:26, Frank Banul frank.ba...@gmail.com wrote:
I just threw away 5 karma to make some changes (but I think
worthwhile). I think the idea is that when there's many more users, 10
silly karma points will be nothing. Until then, have faith, or
something like that. :)
On Saturday 31 October 2009 19:43:40 Andrew Flegg wrote:
After working 'til stupid o'clock last night on a new version of Hermes,
today someone's found a bug which'll impact a small number of people. The
fix is trivial.
However, I find myself *not* wanting to fix it as it'll need to go through
On Oct 31, 2009, at 20:27, Andrew Flegg wrote:
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 19:26, Frank Banul frank.ba...@gmail.com
wrote:
I just threw away 5 karma to make some changes (but I think
worthwhile). I think the idea is that when there's many more users,
10
silly karma points will be nothing.
Hi,
2009/10/31 Attila Csipa ma...@csipa.in.rs:
There is a definitely a conflict there. I support Jeremiah's suggestion that
minor packaging/typo fixes that do not alter app functionality (e.g. when you
go from 1.0-maemo0 to 1.0-maemo1) should not reset app karma. Should require
some
Hi,
From: maemo-developers-boun...@maemo.org [maemo-developers-boun...@maemo.org]
On Behalf Of ext Andrea Grandi [a.gra...@gmail.com]
Sent: 31 October 2009 22:06
To: Attila Csipa
Cc: maemo-developers@maemo.org
Subject: Re: QA process = bug fixing
54 matches
Mail list logo
