On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Michael Catanzaro
mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote:
Non-GNOME programs certainly will not care one way or
the other whether they are broken by vala 0.26 or by vala 0.28. And
the
changes are certainly bugfixes, not features or UI changes that would
be
affected by
On Tue, 2014-08-26 at 12:01 -0700, Jim Nelson wrote:
Yorba's applications were considered non-GNOME for nearly five years
and are still not part of GNOME core (although we're now hosted on the
infrastructure). We *definitely* care when we we're broken between
releases of Vala.
Right right.
Imho it should be considered as a requirement. And no, it isn't blocking
things.
The actual question is, are you comfortable with pushing this right now.
To summarize Evan: nemequ ricotz, consider me a +0.5 vote.
Am 21.08.2014 um 20:41 schrieb Luca Bruno:
Thanks for your hard work. Is this
On Thu, 2014-08-21 at 19:28 +0200, Rico Tzschichholz wrote:
I really like to push the staging changes to master despite being in
the
GNOME freeze. There was also no vala release yet which other projects
could rely on. Official GNOME applications which are using Vala will
be
fixed as fast a
On Sat, 2014-08-23 at 10:12 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
And the
changes are certainly bugfixes, not features or UI changes that would
be
affected by the current freeze.
Nope I was completely wrong, API/ABI is also frozen of course.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed
Thanks for your hard work. Is this change a requirement for the new stable
release? Blocking some software? Can it be merged instead in vala 0.27?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 7:28 PM, Rico Tzschichholz ric...@t-online.de
wrote:
Hi,
I had a small discussion on IRC with Evan about still pushing a
Is this on a branch somewhere? I'd like to know how this affects Geary
(and Yorba's other projects).
-- Jim
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Luca Bruno lethalma...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks for your hard work. Is this change a requirement for the new
stable
release? Blocking some software?
Why is it a requirement? For which applications?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Jim Nelson j...@yorba.org wrote:
Is this on a branch somewhere? I'd like to know how this affects Geary
(and Yorba's other projects).
-- Jim
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Luca Bruno
It's not a requirement. Rico mentioned that these changes affected
Geary. Since it sounds like these changes will either in be 0.26 or
0.28, I was hoping to see what the problems are now rather than be hit
with them later. That's all.
-- Jim
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:01 PM, Luca Bruno
Sorry the question was for Rico.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Jim Nelson j...@yorba.org wrote:
It's not a requirement. Rico mentioned that these changes affected Geary.
Since it sounds like these changes will either in be 0.26 or 0.28, I was
hoping to see what the problems are now
They're in the staging branch. For Geary, the relevant error is at
http://paldo.org:8010/builders/vala-staging/builds/44/steps/geary/logs/stdio
This is due to the binding for Gtk.Window.set_default_icon_list's
argument becoming owned. The change is correct according to the
annotations in GTK+.
Certainly that kind of splitting is unfeasible. I understand there are a
bunch of fixes, however applications work somehow and I wouldn't like to
break them. Also, even if Vala is hosted at GNOME, I remind you there's
plenty of projects relying on Vala. Other applications are as important as
GNOME
On Thu, 2014-08-21 at 21:39 +0200, Luca Bruno wrote:
Certainly that kind of splitting is unfeasible. I understand there are a
bunch of fixes, however applications work somehow and I wouldn't like to
break them. Also, even if Vala is hosted at GNOME, I remind you there's
plenty of projects
Right sorry that's due to the GIR.
Some things seem wrong. For example Gtk.get_default_language return should
be unowned. Why is it owned now?
I guess the same goes for all other static methods.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Evan Nemerson e...@coeus-group.com wrote:
On Thu, 2014-08-21 at
I will probably patch the set_default_icon_list() bug today using
Evan's suggested patch just because it looks like a time-bomb waiting
to go off. It turns out Shotwell has same problem, although that code
has been in place since 2010, so the time-bomb has a slow-burning fuse.
Shotwell has
15 matches
Mail list logo
