>> > here's a small subset of my future plans for Sawfish: >> > >> > in [] the name of the people I would like to ask for >> > help/contribution on that topic >> > >> > Librep/Rep-GTK: R-Wrap >> > >> > Port g-wrap to librep and recreated rep-gtk from scratch with the >> > new mechanism. >> > >> > [Alexey, Jürgen] >> > >> > Sawfish: >> > >> > Compositor >> > Improve system for handling keys/keyboards >> > >> > [Timo, Janek, Teika, Jeremy] >> > >> > Recreate default themes with nicer, more visually appealing >> > graphics, say same theme, but more modern style. >> > Update Translations. >> >> I'm not sure if mxflat is a default theme or not, but since this is >> the theme I use and like it as is, I'd like to ask for keeping it >> intact. In my opinion no change to it is necessary, and especially no >> change for the sake of changing. > > I've never said of all themes have to be changed, but for example I > have a new, more modern Crux theme in mind, but I've never found the > time to gimp it actually. Not that the current one is ugly, but it > looks dusty. > >> > [Community] >> > >> > See also what is proposed in `Proposed Goals' >> > >> > Next Release: 3.0.0 >> > >> > Skipping 1.7.0 and releasing 3.0.0 in Dec '10, so we have 12 months >> > time for the changes we need/want to do. And I guess we'll need >> > them. 1.6x will be supported 6 months with bugfixes and & co, just >> > like 1.3.5x and 1.5x have been. >> >> I'd be more happy with more incremental changes and correspondingly >> more frequent releases. This allows for more testing and more robust >> major releases. > > Well, for 3.0 one alpha, beta and rc is planned, each after 3 months, a > second rc then feature freeze begins. In addition, there will be a > backported 1.7.0, with GTK+2 support, as 3.0 will be based on GTK+3 if > everything goes fine. Atleast that's what got in my mind lately.
That sounds good, I didn't realize sawfish 3 will be based on gtk+3. >> > Any thoughts? >> >> I think a mechanism should be found for testing releases before they >> are actually released. Very simple compilation related problems >> frequently have been arising lately and having buildbots or something >> similar would improve the situation quite a bit. I'm not sure if >> sf.net has facilities for this but I seem to remember they had a >> server farm or some such. Having the buildbots to configure, compile >> and install on multiple linux distros would be a major improvement. > > compilation itself is not the problem, except the 4th hyphen in > --without-nine-mouse-buttons all issues were related to the packaging > scripts, so perhaps the build-service from OpenSUSE would be > interresting. Yes, a build-service or bulidbots, or whatever helping automated testing would be great I think. Cheers, Daniel -- Psss, psss, put it down! - http://www.cafepress.com/putitdown
