On Fri, 27 Oct 2017 14:32:40 +0000 Mike Blumenkrantz <michael.blumenkra...@gmail.com> said:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 8:27 PM Carsten Haitzler <ras...@rasterman.com> > wrote: > > > On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 19:02:58 +0200 marcel-hollerb...@t-online.de said: > > > > > Two things, > > > > > > Calling efl-master unmanagable and unrunable is just spreading a > > > apocalyptic mood and does not really tell what is going on. There are > > > > I absolutely agree. I and many others use master all day every day. For > > wayland > > work it has issues and That is specific to that set of code. Sometimes eo > > work > > disrupts something. But it gets fixed. > > > > > bugs and a few crashes, yes, but the same happened a few years back when > > > i started with efl stuff. (Also, how can you call efl master unstable if > > > you havnt run it in a long time ? :D) > > > > Ooooh. nice catch there. :) > > > > It is indeed inconceivable that I could have periodically tested master, > found it unusable each time, and then gone back to using stable. You've > certainly caught me; well done everyone, and thanks for your hard work in > keeping this mailing list so honest. Let's wrap it up and call it a /thread. You did say exactly: "I haven't run efl master in a long time". That precludes testing as that would be running. Marcel makes a very very very good point. If you claim you have not run it for a very long time, does any evaluation of stability or correctness matter? > > > I guess you are refering to enlightenment when writing > > > > Well actually enlightenment is the far worse offender. It actively chooses > > to > > crash instead of recover. I had a fight with mike about this when i was > > left > > trying to resize a window and every time I did it E crashed. I could never > > resize it. It literally was unusable by explicit CHOICE to crash instead of > > log and move on. > > > > EFL and E policy has always been to be defensive and recover as much as > > possible at all times. Just look at the code with all the magic/eoid, null > > checks and more. > > As a result I received a bug report about this issue and it was resolved, > unlike the current behavior with other EFL-based apps where they just throw > errors, nobody reports them, and master continually regresses to function > worse than the previous release. I'm completely fine with annoying users of > development builds in order to force them to report bugs. If it becomes > intolerable for you then you should be running a release build since that's > what they're for. And yet when you get annoyed by EFL causing you problems that are not nearly as bad you claim it's unusable? Where a bug in EFL in unintentional, your decision to crash is intentional. I'm trying to point out a double standard here. In fact extra worse. First a "Well it's so bad I just don't use it anymore and haven't in a long time" == "I don't want to help or work with EFL development" and in addition: "But hey - anyone who uses E which I work on has to deal with crashes and unsalability by design and that's fine, but I will not tolerate it from EFL where it's unintentional" ? That's what it comes off as. Now if efl is "unusable" is entirely debatable. At least 2 people here disagree with you on that. I use it all day, every day this way and I do not see what you are complaining about. > > > "current workflow of write code -> commit directly to master without any > > > form of testing". I try to test my changes before in enlightenment > > > before commiting something, but do you really expect a dev that pushes a > > > commit to start every single window / setting in e ? Test every single > > > configuration before committing anything ?! Thats not really doable, and > > > as long as there is no automated testsuite noone will ever start to do > > > that. > > > > Indeed the last bit here is the positive part. If we want to make it > > harder to > > break things, having more tests is what we need. Mike - I know you have > > worked > > on some e test stuff. If it's ready for people to use, then perhaps a mail > > about it and docs on how to use it to catch errors would be good. > > Something not > > too invasive (can be run in a window for example which I believe it can > > be... ? > > ). > > > > It has been (and continues to be) completely functional in all engines > since this past March, but I gave up on it within a month or two since > constant EFL regressions made getting even a baseline set of correct image > data for tests impossible. I've been quite busy since then and have not had > the time or interest to revisit the project. One downside of image comparison is that changes can be made that are not regressions or bugs. For example fixing the emoji sizing in text to scale properly if they are color emoji's ... that would change output if previously color emojis were rendered. It's a bug fix from Youngbok. All image comparison does is tell you something changed. It MAY be that the change was legitimate. It may be it is a bug. You don't know until you check. If you assume a change == "unusable change! bug bug bu!" then you're making the wrong assumption. > > > Greetings, > > > bu5hm4n > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 04:48:24PM +0000, Mike Blumenkrantz wrote: > > > > I haven't run efl master in a long time, and I know there are others > > who > > > > have stopped running it for the same reasons that I have. > > > > > > > > I am not necessarily advocating changing to gitflow, but several years > > of > > > > the current development methodology has definitely proven that it is > > > > unmanageable and that some change is needed. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 12:36 PM Tom Hacohen <t...@stosb.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Intended to be would maybe be more appropriate, and then the > > statement > > > > > would still apply. With that being said, I'm sorry to hear that it > > has > > > > > changed, you guys should be spanking b0rokers more, don't let them > > > > > win. > > > > > > > > > > Regardless of that, as said on IRC, the reason why we do trunk > > > > > (master) based development is that we all run master all the time and > > > > > thus test as many configurations as possible all the time. I don't > > see > > > > > why we need a rolling-branch that is more stable (master in the > > > > > gitflow terminology) than the development trunk, because we'll all > > > > > just switch to develop and that's it. > > > > > Andy claims that there are compelling cases. I've read some blog > > posts > > > > > over the years about it, and I'm not convinced. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Tom. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Mike Blumenkrantz > > > > > <michael.blumenkra...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > 'Our master is already considered "stable" and in a release state, > > so it > > > > > > really doesn't match our workflow.' > > > > > > > > > > > > Things have changed a bit since you've been gone, and this is not > > even > > > > > > remotely close to being true anymore. As far as all of my use > > cases go > > > > > > (everyday use on X, testing on Wayland, basic application > > > > > > functionality), master has been completely unusable for this entire > > > > > > release cycle. Based > > > > > on > > > > > > the current workflow of write code -> commit directly to master > > without > > > > > any > > > > > > form of testing, it seems like this will continue to be the case > > for the > > > > > > foreseeable future. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am in no way directing this at you personally, but for us to be > > basing > > > > > > any decision on the above statement is, at this time, nothing more > > than > > > > > > a false premise (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_premise) > > argument. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 8:39 AM Tom Hacohen <t...@stosb.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> I accidentally hit send, didn't mean to. > > > > > >> Here is my full reply: > > > > > >> It's possible, yes, but it doesn't address my initial concerns, > > which > > > > > >> are that edi will stick out compared to the other e projects. This > > > > > >> will be considered a success by you for sure, and I don't see us > > > > > >> changing the efl to follow, so it'll stay different. > > > > > >> Furthermore, once you publish a tag/branch they should remain > > there, > > > > > >> so even if we don't like it, it'll have to stay in edi or at > > least edi > > > > > >> will be different. > > > > > >> Btw, changing HEAD to be "develop" rather than "master" is a bit > > more > > > > > >> intrusive and painful. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Additionally, I just took a look at this gitflow thing, and > > noticed > > > > > >> that it's pretty much what we do but worse (apart of the poor > > mistake > > > > > >> that we did which is having the stable branches be named per repo > > > > > >> rather than having a consistent name, that is, efl-1.7 instead of > > > > > >> stable-1.17). > > > > > >> We never needed a "hotfix" branch, the "release" branch has always > > > > > >> proved sufficient for us (I can see the potential need, we just > > never > > > > > >> hit it). After taking a second look, he deletes branches > > afterwards, > > > > > >> so it's a workflow we can and already do here. > > > > > >> Release branches we already have. > > > > > >> We name our tags v1.17.0 compared to 1.17.0 which I think is > > better. > > > > > >> I don't see the advantage of having a "develop" branch in > > addition to > > > > > >> master given our workflow. Our master is already considered > > "stable" > > > > > >> and in a release state, so it really doesn't match our workflow. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> So I'm not really impressed with this suggestion (and in > > particular > > > > > >> GitFlow), and I don't think it can be done in a way that is > > possible > > > > > >> to revert or is compatible with what we do. > > > > > >> As I said, if you want to test it, test it with your own dev > > branches, > > > > > >> show us that the workflow works and just configure your tools for > > this > > > > > >> testing period, I don't see why the test period needs to have the > > > > > >> formal names. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> You mentioned having tools that work with it, what exactly? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> As a side note, I'm OK with changing the stable release branches > > to > > > > > >> "release-x.y" if people are OK with that, instead of the per repo > > > > > >> naming, this will make it slightly more compatible for you, and > > > > > >> actually makes sense regardless (was a mistake in the first > > place). > > > > > >> > > > > > >> -- > > > > > >> Tom > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Tom Hacohen <t...@stosb.com> > > wrote: > > > > > >> > It is possible, yes. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Carsten Haitzler < > > > > > ras...@rasterman.com> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> >> On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 07:19:51 +0000 Andrew Williams < > > > > > >> a...@andywilliams.me> said: > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >>> Hi, > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> You are absolutely right - the “show it with a smaller > > project and > > > > > >> prove > > > > > >> >>> it’s worth is exactly why I brought it up. I was in the > > process of > > > > > >> doing so > > > > > >> >>> and hit this roadblock. No intention to beat a dead horse - I > > > > > actually > > > > > >> >>> thought I was doing what was agreed. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> Apologies if I got the wrong end of the stick. > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> Well I think doing this with edi is fine. is it possible to > > have > > > > > >> >> just > > > > > >> edi have > > > > > >> >> different branch naming schemes? i don't know. if it's not > > then we > > > > > have > > > > > >> >> problems. but i think we;re on the same page atm "try this in a > > > > > smaller > > > > > >> scale > > > > > >> >> and show it improves things - us that to convince everyone > > else". :) > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >>> Andy > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 at 00:58, Carsten Haitzler < > > > > > ras...@rasterman.com> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > >> >>> > On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 20:15:45 +0000 Andrew Williams < > > > > > >> a...@andywilliams.me> > > > > > >> >>> > said: > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> > We had this discussion before in just one place I believe > > until > > > > > you > > > > > >> asked > > > > > >> >>> > for > > > > > >> >>> > specific branch names to be allowed. You wanted us to > > change how > > > > > we > > > > > >> branch > > > > > >> >>> > and > > > > > >> >>> > work with efl/e etc. the last time. I don't remember there > > being > > > > > >> agreement > > > > > >> >>> > with > > > > > >> >>> > you on needing a change as I don't see our current model > > being > > > > > bad or > > > > > >> >>> > broken > > > > > >> >>> > or causing trouble (discussion already had) vs gitflow. I > > don't > > > > > know > > > > > >> why > > > > > >> >>> > you're > > > > > >> >>> > bringing it back up as if there wasn't a consensus already. > > I > > > > > >> believe the > > > > > >> >>> > last > > > > > >> >>> > discussion was roughly: > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> > "There is no agreement that any change is needed. The > > change you > > > > > >> propose > > > > > >> >>> > does > > > > > >> >>> > nothing to actually improve anything by it's proposal. It > > just > > > > > >> shuffles > > > > > >> >>> > chairs, > > > > > >> >>> > BUT if you really think it's so much better, try it on > > smaller > > > > > >> projects > > > > > >> >>> > first > > > > > >> >>> > and show/prove it to be worth it". > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> > Or something to that effect. Most people were just silent > > on the > > > > > >> topic. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> > > Hi list, > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> > > This conversation seems to have now happened in many > > places and > > > > > it > > > > > >> seems > > > > > >> >>> > > that a few key individuals don't really see why we should > > be > > > > > >> looking at > > > > > >> >>> > > different branching models. I understand that opinion but > > if we > > > > > >> don't try > > > > > >> >>> > > new things then we will never be able to engage with new > > > > > process or > > > > > >> >>> > > technologies so I am keen to try gitflow nonetheless. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> > > So at this point I would like this thread to record a > > > > > >> >>> > > definitive > > > > > >> >>> > decision. > > > > > >> >>> > > Will we allow reduced branch name restrictions on our git > > > > > >> repositories or > > > > > >> >>> > > not? > > > > > >> >>> > > Thanks, > > > > > >> >>> > > Andy > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 at 11:43 Andrew Williams < > > > > > a...@andywilliams.me > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >>> > wrote: > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > Hi TAsn, > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > Thanks for the reply. In gitflow these are the > > standards and > > > > > >> they need > > > > > >> >>> > to > > > > > >> >>> > > > work across different users hence why having the > > developer > > > > > >> namespace > > > > > >> >>> > is not > > > > > >> >>> > > > quite enough. Additionally the hotfix is not catered > > for in > > > > > our > > > > > >> current > > > > > >> >>> > > > scheme (as I understand it). > > > > > >> >>> > > > One nice thing with gitflow is the plugin that manages > > all > > > > > >> >>> > > > the > > > > > >> branches > > > > > >> >>> > > > for you. If you have custom schemes then every person > > looking > > > > > to > > > > > >> take > > > > > >> >>> > up > > > > > >> >>> > > > development has to configure it before getting started, > > so > > > > > >> >>> > > > the > > > > > >> >>> > defaults are > > > > > >> >>> > > > best if possible. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > I appreciate that consistency is important but taken so > > > > > >> stringently it > > > > > >> >>> > > > means we can never try anything new... An earlier > > discussion > > > > > on > > > > > >> >>> > GitFlow led > > > > > >> >>> > > > to raster saying that he would need to see it working to > > > > > >> understand the > > > > > >> >>> > > > value - so I would like to do just that. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > I understand that folk don't necessarily see the value, > > but I > > > > > >> have done > > > > > >> >>> > > > and would like to try it for the projects that I am > > managing. > > > > > >> That > > > > > >> >>> > > > shouldn't be too onerous I think? Also as apps move from > > > > > >> autotools to > > > > > >> >>> > meson > > > > > >> >>> > > > we already have a reduced consistency between projects. > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > Thanks, > > > > > >> >>> > > > Andy > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 at 11:34 Tom Hacohen <t...@stosb.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > > >> >>> > > >> Heya, > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > >> I don't quite understand what you are trying to do > > here. I > > > > > >> mean, I > > > > > >> >>> > > >> understand you are trying to have these, but what are > > these > > > > > >> branches > > > > > >> >>> > > >> for? If it's for you developing your own features why > > not > > > > > >> >>> > > >> put > > > > > >> it in a > > > > > >> >>> > > >> dev branch? > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > >> We have these enforcements because we want to enforce > > branch > > > > > >> names to > > > > > >> >>> > > >> follow a consistent pattern across the repos. I don't > > mind > > > > > >> changing it > > > > > >> >>> > > >> per se, > > > > > >> >>> > > >> though: > > > > > >> >>> > > >> 1. I don't really see an obvious value with gitflow. > > > > > >> >>> > > >> 2. I'd prefer if it was consistent across repos. > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > >> Maybe people don't agree with this, but my take > > towards the > > > > > >> >>> > > >> e > > > > > >> repos is > > > > > >> >>> > > >> similar to that > > > > > >> >>> > > >> of the GNU project. Have everything follow similar > > > > > >> >>> > > >> guidelines > > > > > >> and be > > > > > >> >>> > > >> mostly similar, > > > > > >> >>> > > >> making it easier for devs to jump across projects. > > Yes, that > > > > > >> >>> > > >> consistency sometimes > > > > > >> >>> > > >> comes with a price, but I think that it's worth it. > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > >> Looking forward to hearing what other people think. > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > >> -- > > > > > >> >>> > > >> Tom. > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > >> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Andrew Williams < > > > > > >> >>> > a...@andywilliams.me> > > > > > >> >>> > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > Hi git admins, > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > I'm setting up gitflow on Edi but I can't push to > > origin > > > > > >> because of > > > > > >> >>> > the > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > branch naming rules. Can you please open up the > > ability to > > > > > >> have > > > > > >> >>> > remote > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > branches matching the patterns "develop", > > "feature/*", > > > > > >> "bugfix/*", > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > "release/*", "hotfix/*" and "support/*"? > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > I'd really appreciate it thanks. > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > Oh and to those who worried about "changing to > > develop > > > > > branch > > > > > >> is an > > > > > >> >>> > > >> extra > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > step" don't fear as HEAD can be pointed to develop > > instead > > > > > of > > > > > >> >>> > master if > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > that's what folk are looking to have set up :) > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > Cheers, > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > Andrew > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > -- > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > http://andywilliams.me > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > http://ajwillia.ms > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the > > world's > > > > > >> most > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! > > > > > http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> >>> > > >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the > > world's > > > > > most > > > > > >> >>> > > >> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! > > http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > > > >> >>> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > > > >> >>> > > >> enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > > > >> >>> > > >> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > >> >>> > > >> > > > > > >> >>> > > > -- > > > > > >> >>> > > > http://andywilliams.me > > > > > >> >>> > > > http://ajwillia.ms > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > > >> >>> > > -- > > > > > >> >>> > > http://andywilliams.me > > > > > >> >>> > > http://ajwillia.ms > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> >>> > > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the > > world's most > > > > > >> >>> > > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! > > http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > > > >> >>> > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > >> >>> > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > > > >> >>> > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> > -- > > > > > >> >>> > ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" > > > > > >> -------------- > > > > > >> >>> > Carsten Haitzler - ras...@rasterman.com > > > > > >> >>> > > > > > > >> >>> > -- > > > > > >> >>> http://andywilliams.me > > > > > >> >>> http://ajwillia.ms > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> -- > > > > > >> >> ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" > > > > > -------------- > > > > > >> >> Carsten Haitzler - ras...@rasterman.com > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > > > > >> >> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > > > >> >> _______________________________________________ > > > > > >> >> enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > > > >> >> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > > > >> >> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > > > > >> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > > > >> enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > > > >> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > > > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > > > > > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > > > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > > > > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > > > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > > _______________________________________________ > > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > > > > -- > > ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- > > Carsten Haitzler - ras...@rasterman.com > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > > _______________________________________________ > > enlightenment-devel mailing list > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > _______________________________________________ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- Carsten Haitzler - ras...@rasterman.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
