I agree, will create new branch On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Maxim, > > I would prefer option 2. > > It will be a bit more effort, but I think there are more advantages. > > 1. > > 3.1.x will be clear and it need to be like that, if we talk about critical > issues that might be discovered somehow. > > 2. > > We also need to take code-signing in account. I suggest to release a new > version as soon as it is possible to sign the code again. And there is no > forecast when it is possible. > > > > And over all, I have no idea how long it takes, to rebuild the rooms. > Probably we get a few ideas from the community what could be implemented > and how. Maybe it is a good idea to ask in the user-list for ideas and > requests, with the goal that this work need to be done just one time... > > > Greetings Peter > > > Am 14.04.2016 um 08:07 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: > >> I would like to continue discussion and get your opinion on how "HTML5 >> features" should be added to the room. >> >> I see 3 options >> 1) development is performed in 3.1.x branch >> Pros: >> >> - we don't need to maintain additional branch >> - dev versions to test can be taken from usual location >> - we will "burn the bridge" and next release will contain updated room >> >> Cons: >> >> - 3.1.x will be unusable for some period of time >> - some well tested features might be broken during merge >> >> >> 2) additional 3.2.x branch is created >> Pros: >> >> - 3.1.x branch will stay clear and we can release some patch versions >> >> Cons: >> >> - we have to maintain 3 branches >> >> >> 3) development is performed in trunk >> Pros: >> >> - no new branches >> >> Cons: >> >> - "OpenLaszlo free" branch is no more "OpenLaszlo free" :( >> >> >> I personally prefer option 1) above, but option 2) might also be OK due to >> our last 2 releases were not properly signed and we might need to release >> 3.1.2 without new room .... >> >> >> WDYT? >> >> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> ok.. I will try to get a few people here to help me... ;-) >>> >>> >>> Am 12.04.2016 um 07:26 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: >>> >>> Thanks for the response Peter :) >>>> will start adding HTML5 features to the room :) >>>> will send requests for testing :) >>>> >>>> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Peter Dähn <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Maxim, >>>> >>>>> no help with the list from my site.. It is working I think ;-) >>>>> >>>>> 2nd part.. >>>>> >>>>> I wouldn't say ugly... it is more like "no surprises"... Like using >>>>> java-applications... you know the colors, button style etc... and more >>>>> html5 would be one more step to get ride of flash... I would appreciate >>>>> that... >>>>> >>>>> Greetings Peter >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Am 07.04.2016 um 20:11 schrieb Maxim Solodovnik: >>>>> >>>>> Hello All, >>>>> >>>>>> I currently using this list [1] as the list of features for 3.1.2, >>>>>> maybe >>>>>> it >>>>>> is not perfect and you know how to make it better? :))) >>>>>> Additionally today I heard "OM room is ugly" :( I can add more HTML5 >>>>>> elements to the room (WebSockets semms to work as expected) >>>>>> >>>>>> WDYT? >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENMEETINGS-853?jql=project%20%3D%20OPENMEETINGS%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%203.1.2%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >> -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
