Created https://gitlab.xfce.org/xfce/xfce4-dev-tools/-/merge_requests/91
Also noticed we didn't even have a 4.18 branch for xfce4-dev-tools, so I pushed
that from the 4.18.0 tag. And it looks like there are a few bugfixes in master
since 4.18.0 that we might want to put in the 4.18 series as well. After we
get this done I'll collect them and create a new PR for those.
-b
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023, at 12:30, Brian Tarricone wrote:
> Ok, sounds good, thanks for the feedback, everyone.
>
> Alex, totally get you're uncomfortable with adding new stuff to the stable
> series, but these are isolated additions, not changes to existing macros or
> functionality, so I think the risk should be very low. And any app not using
> them shouldn't be affected at all.
>
> I'll prepare a 4.18 backport PR for the macros, and assuming everyone is ok
> with it, we can get a 4.18 release out.
>
> Thanks all!
>
> -brian
>
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2023, at 12:11, [email protected] wrote:
>> Hi,
>> +1 vote for option 2, this is an exceptional situation and just adding those
>> macros shouldn't cause any problem if I understood it right.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Andre Miranda
>>
>> Oct 16, 2023, 13:57 by [email protected]:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> As theses are new macros, we can make an exception and backports them to
>>> xdt 4.18. Don't forget to bump minimal xdt versions in autogen :)
>>> Yes, others distros haven't noticed the problem because they don't re run
>>> autoreconf.
>>>
>>> Romain,
>>>
>>> Le 16 octobre 2023 11:31:17 GMT+02:00, "Gaël Bonithon"
>>> <[email protected]> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> I'd vote for 2): I don't think there's much risk either and we've been
>>>> testing these macros for a while now with xfdesktop, xfce4-notifyd and
>>>> more recently xfce4-panel, at least.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Gaël
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------- Original Message -------
>>>> On Monday, October 16th, 2023 at 5:58 AM, Alex <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi all,
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > thanks for the forward Brian! As well added Skunnyk and Andre.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Personally I would go for the more conservative 1) to prevent possible
>>>> > further trouble with them on the stable branch ... maybe with a comment
>>>> > to swap them out for the xfce-4.20 official macros, once xfce4.20 is
>>>> > released.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Though I did not look into the Makros in detail ... if you are sure that
>>>> > 2) will be save / will not have side effects, it as well would be fine
>>>> > with it.
>>>> >
>>>> > Cheers, Alex
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Am 16.10.23 um 03:51 schrieb Brian Tarricone:
>>>> >
>>>> > > Gah, sorry about that, I didn't even think of the fact that distros
>>>> > > would need the newer 4.19 dev-tools package for packaging.>> CC'd
>>>> > > Alex; Alex, for some more context (some of it got snipped): we've
>>>> > > started depending on some macros I added to xfce4-dev-tools in the
>>>> > > 4.19.x series (the XDT_CHECK_OPTIONAL_FEATURE stuff), but in stable
>>>> > > versions of things (xfce4-terminal, xfce4-notifyd). Turns out that's
>>>> > > making things difficult for packagers.>> So I think we have two good
>>>> > > options:>> 1) We can put the new m4 macros in a .m4 file, prefix them
>>>> > > with something else so they don't conflict, and copy it into each
>>>> > > project that uses them and wants to do stable releases for now. Then
>>>> > > those modules can run against xfce4-dev-tools 4.18 again.>> 2) We can
>>>> > > backport the new macros to the 4.18 branch of xfce4-dev-tools. Since
>>>> > > they're just additions, I don't think there's much risk of problems.>>
>>>> > > Ok ok, there's also 3) go back to manually listing out the
>>>> > > dependencies in each configure.ac and gating X11/Wayland support on
>>>> > > them. But I don't feel like doing that ;)>> Gaël, Alex, what do you
>>>> > > think? Feel free to CC anyone else who should weigh in. Personally I
>>>> > > think #2 is the easiest, especially as more non-core modules want to
>>>> > > support Wayland and need compile-time support for it, but not sure
>>>> > > putting new macros in the stable series of xfce4-dev-tools is ok to
>>>> > > do.>> -brian>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2023, at 15:11, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Sun, 2023-10-15 at 21:08 +0000, Gaël Bonithon wrote:
>>>> > > >>>> We have the same issue for xfce4-notifyd but then I assumed 0.9
>>>> > > >>>> was the
>>>> > > >>>> development branch leading to a 0.10 release for Xfce 4.20. So we
>>>> > > >>>> pushed
>>>> > > >>>> it to
>>>> > > >>>> experimental without too much fuss.
>>>> > > >>>
>>>> > > >>> Xfce4-notifyd 0.9.x are not dev versions as far as I know.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Well that doesn't change the fact that we can't upload it to unstable
>>>> > > now :)
>>>> > > >>>
>>>> > > >>>> Well, if you have it and it's sensible, yes sure.
>>>> > > >>>
>>>> > > >>> See the attached patch. Not all XDT_CHECK_OPTIONAL_FEATURE
>>>> > > >>> features are
>>>> > > >>> reproduced, but it should be enough. And since it has a limited
>>>> > > >>> impact, it
>>>> > > >>> should continue to apply until Xfce 4.20.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Thanks, I'll try that and report back (also, no need to encrypt direct
>>>> > > mail,
>>>> > > since it's sent in cleartext to a mailing list anyway).
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Regards,
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>
>
