Am 13.03.2011 um 05:17 schrieb Evan Schoenberg, M.D.: > The fact of the matter is that were to release 1.5 right now, we'd have a > huge mess on our hands. It's unstable. We should be in internal_converge_2 > right now, but I just don't see that being a 1 month process prior to release.
If we drop 10.5 support now how is that going to improve stability of 1.5hg? How can we make Trunk more stable, how can we get closer to a release of code that has been in development for 1,5 years? Unless we find a dozen or so interested and competent developers somewhere I believe the only to get there is announcing a string-freeze (at least that's how it "works" for Pidgin and rekkanoryo). On the contrary, opening the door for implementing code that deprecates 10.5 might just mean it will take even longer to move 1.5 closer to release. > On one hand, if merges were Really Easy even with large changes, I would > propose the following. I thought this possibility through prior to my initial > email in this thread: > 1. Continue work on fb-xmpp for Adium 1.4.2. > 2. Merge this when complete to Adium 1.5. > 3. Feature-freeze Adium 1.5. > 4. Converge; and prepare for beta > 5. Branch when 1.5b1 is released. Expect minimal 1.5.x releases, as we have > with 1.4. > 6. Trunk becomes 1.6hg, which is 10.6+. That's what I have in mind. > The problem with this series of steps is that Apple has dealt a hand to > developers in which supporting 10.5 – or supporting PPC – means using > outdated tools and technology. Until step 6 is done, anyone who chooses to > install the primary distribution of Xcode is unable to contribute to Adium > (or even to build from source). We have to ask any potential contributor to > download a 4.4 GB installer (xcode 3.2.6) and install the 11.9 GB > distribution as a simple prerequisite to participating. To me, that is the strongest argument. However, it is somewhat damaged by that the fact that Xcode 4 is very buggy. That and at the fact you need a credit card to buy the 5$ app unless you're paying 100$ to Apple already, will keep a good portion of possible new contributors using Xcode 3. Plus, BJ Homer wrote > you can absolutely use the 10.6 SDK and run on Leopard (and thus Xcode 4 can > be used without dropping Leopard) > Large feature branches are only sustainable if the trunk from which they > branched stays grossly similar. If we were to branch 1.5 at this point > (maintaining, for a time, adium-1.4, adium-1.5, and adium which would be > 1.6hg), we'd end up with increasingly complex merges as 1.5 and 1.6 rapidly > diverged. I thought we moved to a DVCS in the first place to allow this sort of situation. Thijs for example has already set up a fork on Bitbucket working on libdispatch support. > The outpouring of responses from developers in this thread shows the > enthusiasm at being able to use modern tools and tech. This is what I've seen every time a new OS came around in the past few years so I can't say I'm surprised. Developers will always be excited to use new features and API . But in my opinion Adium should be more than a testing field for new stuff Apple comes up with. > So I don't think the steps above are appropriate. I think that we should > move with the times. That means 10.6+ and Intel-only. > > This leaves out a number of users. I wish it didn't, but the alternative is > leaving out a number of developers... which in turn would mean less for the > larger number of users to use and enjoy. Based on the arguments I have given in this thread, I don't think keeping 10.5 should leave out a large humber of developers. Naturally, my opposition (especially as a non-programming contributor) shouldn't stop you guys doing what you think is best for the Adium Project but I feel it is important to present a diverging perspective. > <snip> > > -Evan Robbie
