[gnome-panel] Created branch gnome-3-16
The branch 'gnome-3-16' was created pointing to: 0f58189... Fixes to Catalan translation ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
[zenity] Created branch gnome-3-16
The branch 'gnome-3-16' was created pointing to: 6edd0ba... Bump to 3.16.0 ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
g-c-c UI freeze break request - bug 743400
Hi, I'd like to push the patches in https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=743400 . There's a screenshot with changes there. Those patches also add new translatable strings for a11y purposes. Thanks, Rui ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Carlos Soriano Sanchez csori...@redhat.com wrote: Hi Magdalen, Thanks for your kind words. Still people like Allan and other people did a lot of work on this as well. I can provide my feelings when started contributing and personal vision, but they have the experience. I appreciate this. My main consideration I was urging Allan (and others generally) to make here, is that with increasing experience it can become harder and harder to remember what it's like to actually be a newcomer and see these things through their eyes. The experience of navigating through all this documentation between the wiki.gnome.org and developer.gnome.org, trying to figure out which documentation is reliable before carrying out commands, is something that is easy to forget about, and that's a bit of an inevitability; so it's understandable, but because of that, we probably all need to try to be weary of as time goes on. So I won't go alone on this if they don't agree =) That would mean I'm missing something. I wasn't suggesting you go it alone. I was giving my opinion on your proposal, given that this seemed to be what you were after. If you are only interested in feedback from specific people then it's probably advisable to make that clear from the outset. Magdalen ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Re: [gnome-boxes] (3 commits) Created branch gnome-3-17
Done. 2015-03-04 23:01 GMT+01:00 Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) zeesha...@gnome.org: On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Lasse Schuirmann lasse.schuirm...@gmail.com wrote: This branch was created as Zeeshan requested. If I understood him correctly he wanted this as temporary branch to park patches to be rebased on master after release anyway (so this branch will be deleted at some point). Correct! Maybe we should have just named it wip/gnome-3-17 or some such to make it clear). Lasse, Thanks for taking care of this but could you please rename it to make it clear. -- Regards, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) Befriend GNOME: http://www.gnome.org/friends/ ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org
Hi Allan, On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Carlos Soriano Sanchez csori...@redhat.com wrote: Hi Allan, So if we continue with the wiki, most of the points I pointed before continue to be a problem... New jhbuild/git/whatever tutorials will came up... people won't find the appropriate one given that the wiki is not official. Echo this. The developer.gnome jhbuild instructions are quite misleading because they are not up to date. Yet, this is where newcomers are rightfully, most likely to look first and to trust most. i.e. people say: it's a wiki, just modify it! Which is true, but I don't think we want that for something like this. Some people will prefer one tutorial over the other, and we will continue to link different tutorials and continue maintaining all of them and having to deal with a mix set up of the newcomers and newcomers will continue to be confused going back and forward on different guides. This. Carlos seems to be doing a good job of empathising with newcomers in this proposal and personally, I think his assessment is pretty on the money. Tutorials need to be trustworthy, current, comprehensive and provide step by step guides to really be able to help a newcomer get to grips with a concept or skill in certain cases e.g. jhbuild. Carlos has identified a barrier newcomers face when they are learning about GNOME and his suggested solution seems pretty sensible. We can agree on something like this wiki tutorial is the one we recommend, but we can't enforce it at all if we not move to a official page like developers.gnome.org So if it is a matter of logical splitting about 3rd party apps and Gnome contribution, I don't think it matters that much in practice no? What do you propose to fix these problems if not? This is the only idea that came to my mind. Cheers, Carlos Soriano ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-l...@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Re: String freeze break for gnome-photos
Ping. On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote: On Tue, 2015-03-10 at 21:25 +0530, Pranav Kant wrote: Here is the bug[1] to fix delete notifications [1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=745756 Patch has been marked as needs-work. Once it's been accepted by maintainer, please ping. Sorry for that. andre -- Andre Klapper | ak...@gmx.net http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/ -- Regards, Pranav Kant, Department of Computer Science National Institute of Technology Hamirpur http://pricked.in/ ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org
Hi Allan, Thanks a lot for your feedback, disagreement is the best to reach an agreement =) This is not important I don't feel jhbuidl to me in practice very different. We do the same with git. What I want is creating an assistant (like a GtkAssistant, only one direction) which explains the firsts steps using whatever is necessary. Your proposal here is: when the jhbuild part arrives, link to another page. That was my intention previously as well, but that changed when the topic proposal came to my mind. Instead of linking for every tool manual, create a single page with whatever is necessary, not focusing in the actual tools. This is what https://wiki.gnome.org/GnomeLove/BuildGnome currently does. When we were discussing about adding a Getting started in jhbuild *completely* equal to BuildGnome jhbuild part, these problems arise in my mind: - That getting started is for just contributing to Gnome? Can we make others assumptions as well? Jhbuild still is a generic tool. If we do this (and whatever we do with GnomeLove we still want this), I see the Ryan Lortie guide (HowDoI/Jhbuild) a better fit here. - So at the end of the guide, we link to contribute with patches https://wiki.gnome.org/GnomeLove/CodeContributionWorkflow?? Seems unrelated. - So they go back and forward instead of remaining in the same page? But to be honest, I don't mind doing it like what you want. It's not even a concern for me right now. -- This is important =) So your assumption is right, moving most of the material of GnomeLove. I understand what you mean with removing community maintained, but can be misleading for others. Let me explain: developer.gnome.org is still maintained by the community, but they go through a review process, and gives control to the maintainers. Like any project we have in git. I agree is not that easy to edit, and that can to remove some quick edit from community. That is what we will miss. But if we make it intelligent, the pages won't need much maintainability. Contributing to Gnome didn't changed that much in the years I have been contributing (3). Why is a problem the wiki? Why we have that feeling that currently is difficult to maintain the wiki, if we move to a website we are making even more difficult? Seems I'm going to do just the opposite of what we want right? =) Let me explain. For what I saw in this years, the burden of the difficulty is not in editing the wiki, but in the variety of what we have! And I am 100% sure about this from my POV. I edited 5 different jhbuild pages, 2 different guides to get started, 3 guides for git... etc. and everything is scattered. So imagine, I take now a OPW to clean everything of this. In one year we will have the same problem =) I can't be bold in the wiki, I don't feel to be bold in the wiki. A specific example (and this one is what made the topic proposal came to my mind): I wrote for some months BuildGnome alongside removing some guides (reaching an agreement really takes long time) and trying to discuss everything. I finished, and I linked BuildGnome on GnomeLove as the *official* guide. One month after that Ryan Lortie write a full jhbuild guide in HowDoI/Jhbuild because he thought there were no guide for jhbuild! He is a experienced developer and couldn't notice we had 3 jhbuild guides at that point! Clearly we are doing something wrong... So what now? After he spent that much time writing that very well explained guide, I say to him: hey sorry, I'm going to delete because we already have others and in GnomeLove we already have one linked. No, I don't feel like doing it. We can't stop new jhbuild/git tutorials. What I think we have to do is make clear we have a official one, and that needs review to *create* or *modify* it. There we can be bold, because we will have the control, and we will avoid telling people we will remove their material. To finalize, can you say to me which pages need that much work from you? It was because they were unmaintained? Or it was because all were scattered and need a big reorder? Could we getting rid of that parts that need change over the time, or write it in a way that doesn't need to change? I'm curious how didn't you notice the same I'm thinking. That those pages actually don't change that much, but is actually the scattered of those which makes it the need to change them. If we do it intelligently, I can imagine that the need to maintain it will be almost null =) What does bus factor 1 mean? Cheers, Carlos Soriano ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org
Hello all, We couldn't reach an agreement and the idea didn't have too much support from long time community members, so I'm dropping this proposal for now and therefore not taking an OPW intern. Thanks all for the feedback and time. Cheers, Carlos Soriano ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org
Hi Magdalen, Thanks for your kind words. Still people like Allan and other people did a lot of work on this as well. I can provide my feelings when started contributing and personal vision, but they have the experience. So I won't go alone on this if they don't agree =) That would mean I'm missing something. Cheers, Carlos Soriano ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org
Hi Emmanuele, So for the scope and scale you are right, but I'm trying to higher the scope and scale of building and contributing to GNOME as well. Not to be in par with Gtk+, but enough to deserve to be in the website. You are logically right about Legitimacy is provided by being on the gnome.org domain, not whether the page is on a wiki but in practice I think is not enough. The wiki will continue to be a wiki, editable by anyone, without any review process. And even if the tutorial I made recently is the linked one in GnomeLove, people in IRC link to other tutorials and they all have the same legitimacy since they are in the wiki. We are not transmitting and enforcing this. And a clear way to show the world we are doing it, is having the full guide in a official place. As for your worry about easiness of editing the page... If we do it well enough, we shouldn't need lot of maintenance. See for example the wiki page I created for this https://wiki.gnome.org/GnomeLove/BuildGnome Nothing here should change in a foreseable future. The only thing to maintain is a list of supported distros (distros that works out of the box). I'm not convinced on listing all workarounds for distros that doesn't work well with jhbuild, it's even more problems for newcomers, and when I started I was very angry about trying to do it in ubuntu and not being able to. I would payed for someone saying to me: we know a distro named Fedora/Opensuse works out of the box. And the workarounds is a hell to maintain, and didn't work for us at all until now. So far, I can't see anything else requiring too much contribution that a wiki will let people do it easier. What do you think? Cheers, Carlos Soriano - Original Message - From: Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com To: Carlos Soriano Sanchez csori...@redhat.com Cc: gnome-doc-list@gnome.org, desktop-devel-list desktop-devel-l...@gnome.org Sent: Wednesday, 18 March, 2015 1:09:04 PM Subject: Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org Hi; On 17 March 2015 at 12:33, Carlos Soriano Sanchez csori...@redhat.com wrote: So after some work in GnomeLove and discussions in the gnome-love list, I would like to make this proposal. Read more here https://wiki.gnome.org/CarlosSoriano/GnomeLoveMoveTask So I would want to have feedback on this idea over this week, since I will take a intern from OPW for it, and the deadline is next Monday. What do you think? =) Hope you like the idea. I'm a little bit worried that you're trading off the ability to easily keep the page up to date with a more convoluted process that requires learning Mallard, committing to a Git repository, and then updating the page on d.g.o. You note this as well, but then you mention Getting started with GTK+ which does not really apply in the same way as building and contributing to GNOME — the scope and scale of the two efforts are clearly not similar. Why is having a page on the wiki a problem? Legitimacy is provided by being on the gnome.org domain, not whether the page is on a wiki. Would having a prominent link on developer.gnome.org solve the issue of the Google page ranking, while keeping the page easily editable? Ciao, Emmanuele. -- https://www.bassi.io [@] ebassi [@gmail.com] ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org
Hi Michael Hill, Whops I misunderstood you. You are right, HowDoI will continue to be like is now. I don't have any intention there. Actually, HowDoI/Jhbuild is so good that it could be in the official Jhbuild documentation instead, as a getting started with jhbuild since HowDoI/Jhbuild is well explained and generic and I think is a good fit for that purpose. But I will delegate that decision to Jhbuild maintainers. Cheers, Carlos Soriano - Original Message - From: Michael Hill mdhil...@gmail.com To: Carlos Soriano Sanchez csori...@redhat.com Cc: gnome-doc-list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org, desktop-devel-list desktop-devel-l...@gnome.org Sent: Thursday, 19 March, 2015 3:37:18 PM Subject: Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org Hi Carlos, On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Carlos Soriano Sanchez csori...@redhat.com wrote: I am not testing only how a beginner person that came to a hackfest, given a tutorial on jhbuild and fedora distro, how it successfully builds. This is only the tip of the iceberg. Jhbuild is just a a part of a tool for something much bigger. Discovering and contributing to Gnome. I applaud your efforts to address these issues for beginners. I was trying to correct the misconception held by Michael and others that the goal is to eliminate HowDoI/Jhbuild, a useful tool that isn't *only* for beginners. Mike ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org
Hi Allan, So if we continue with the wiki, most of the points I pointed before continue to be a problem... New jhbuild/git/whatever tutorials will came up... people won't find the appropriate one given that the wiki is not official. i.e. people say: it's a wiki, just modify it! Which is true, but I don't think we want that for something like this. Some people will prefer one tutorial over the other, and we will continue to link different tutorials and continue maintaining all of them and having to deal with a mix set up of the newcomers and newcomers will continue to be confused going back and forward on different guides. We can agree on something like this wiki tutorial is the one we recommend, but we can't enforce it at all if we not move to a official page like developers.gnome.org So if it is a matter of logical splitting about 3rd party apps and Gnome contribution, I don't think it matters that much in practice no? What do you propose to fix these problems if not? This is the only idea that came to my mind. Cheers, Carlos Soriano ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org
Hi, So after some work in GnomeLove and discussions in the gnome-love list, I would like to make this proposal. Read more here https://wiki.gnome.org/CarlosSoriano/GnomeLoveMoveTask So I would want to have feedback on this idea over this week, since I will take a intern from OPW for it, and the deadline is next Monday. What do you think? =) Hope you like the idea. Cheers, Carlos Soriano ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
question from a newby
Thinking I downloaded the Virtualbox correctly I find that every time I try to click any command w/in that window the window itself disappears and nothing is done. It's as if I only succeeded in getting the GUI for Virtualbox and nothing else. Can someone help me here? Thank you! Jonathan Beckett ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org
Hi Michael Hill, Didn't you received private messages from newcomers overwhelmed with the different ways on how to contribute a patch? On how to do this or that in git? On how to know the code style? On how to just get the code? Why I have to read multiple tutorials? Because I did. And guides of different kinds came up... Also, did you see the questions of newcomers in gnome-love? They ask those things. And we, people helping, waste time figuring out their set up. Why are you developing the patch in master? Why don't you create a branch? You just lose all the work you have been doing... oh but that guide told me yes I know, sorry for that, I didn't know you were following that guide and not this other one. I feel heartbreaked every time a newcomer says to me this is too much trouble and confusing. They just want a unique short guide to hack their firsts patches. I am not testing only how a beginner person that came to a hackfest, given a tutorial on jhbuild and fedora distro, how it successfully builds. This is only the tip of the iceberg. Jhbuild is just a a part of a tool for something much bigger. Discovering and contributing to Gnome. Cheers, Carlos Soriano - Original Message - From: Michael Hill mdhil...@gmail.com To: Michael Catanzaro mcatanz...@gnome.org Cc: desktop-devel-list desktop-devel-l...@gnome.org, gnome-doc-list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org Sent: Thursday, 19 March, 2015 2:54:33 PM Subject: Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:11 AM, Michael Catanzaro mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: Having multiple conflicting tutorials is confusing to new contributors, and harmful when those two tutorials are incompatible. Disclaimer: I am not a jhbuild beginner. Please find an example other than jhbuild for harmful incompatible tutorials. Regardless of other documentation that existed when the HowDoI was created, it is actively updated as jhbuild changes by Ryan, a developer and contributor to jhbuild. It has proven ideal in a hackfest environment for all levels of user (although an intern at a hackfest can't be classified as a beginner either). It's where I look to see what has changed with jhbuild since the last time I ran it, and is arguably the best source of information for other tutorials whose goal is to *not* conflict. It regularly achieves legitimacy by being replicated on developer.gnome.org , where it's cleverly concealed from beginners performing case-sensitive searches. It brings the perspective of multiple platforms. Mike ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
Re: String freeze break for gnome-photos
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 12:49 AM, Daniel Mustieles García daniel.mustie...@gmail.com wrote: Ehhmmm... some context or something about this? ;-) Here is the bug[1] to fix delete notifications (making it more verbose) in gnome-photos, making it consistent with other applications. Older strings : Selected item has been deleted, Selected items have been deleted Proposed string change : %s deleted, %d item deleted, %d items deleted where %s is the name of the string and %d is the number of items deleted. It would be good to have these in 3.16, just to make these delete notification strings consistent among all applications; hence, I am asking for a string freeze for 3.16. [1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=745756 2015-03-11 15:28 GMT+01:00 Alexandre Franke alexandre.fra...@gmail.com: i18n 1/2. -- Alexandre Franke ___ gnome-i18n mailing list gnome-i...@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n -- Regards, Pranav Kant, Department of Computer Science National Institute of Technology Hamirpur http://pricked.in/ ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
String freeze break for gnome-photos
Here is the bug[1] to fix delete notifications (making it more verbose) in gnome-photos, making it consistent with other applications. Older strings : Selected item has been deleted, Selected items have been deleted Proposed string change : %s deleted, %d item deleted, %d items deleted where %s is the name of the string and %d is the number of items deleted. It would be good to have these in 3.16, just to make these delete notification strings consistent among all applications; hence, I am asking for a string freeze for 3.16. [1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=745756 -- Regards, Pranav Kant, Department of Computer Science National Institute of Technology Hamirpur http://pricked.in/ ___ gnome-doc-list mailing list gnome-doc-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
