Continuous Builds in GNOME

I found this discussion really fascinating and so I wanted to continue it, separately from Emmanuele's thread so that issue is resolved without bifurcating the discussion. My thoughts are that we really shouldn't be looking at something and say 'well, we can't do it we don't have the resources'

Re: Enabling builddir != srcdir by default in jhbuild

[ Picking this up again ] I've been spending the last couple of days fixing modules on git.gnome.org (you may have noticed a commit or two from me on your modules fixing builddir != srcdir issues); submitting bugs/patches to modules that are hosted elsewhere; and disabling non-srcdir builds

Re: GNOME Games source name

On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 03:10:59PM +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote: > If you want an application to be > renamed, you'd better make sure that you can actually come up with a > good name, and argue why it is an insurmountable problem to call the > package "gnome-games-app" or similar in your

Re: Enabling builddir != srcdir by default in jhbuild

On 31/05/2016 19:04, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: > b) we don't have the resources to set up and maintain a try server > running continuous I've been recently playing with the CI service provided by gitlab.com and I find it very convenient: you just have to create a single file in your repository,

Re: GNOME Games source name

On Thu, 2016-06-02 at 15:03 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > 2016-06-02 14:38 GMT+02:00 Bastien Nocera : > > And for gnome-photos you expect a collection of photos? > > Jeremy raised valid concerns which I share and your response are > snide remarks. > > This is not constructive.

Re: GNOME Games source name

2016-06-02 14:38 GMT+02:00 Bastien Nocera : > And for gnome-photos you expect a collection of photos? Jeremy raised valid concerns which I share and your response are snide remarks. This is not constructive. Please take the concerns of your users and downstreams more

Re: GNOME Games source name

On Thu, 2016-06-02 at 13:03 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > 2016-06-02 11:24 GMT+02:00 Bastien Nocera : > > gnome-games package in your distribution "gnome-games-app". There's > > already prior art in that case with epiphany, the web browser vs. > > the > > game. > > Right, I

Re: Re: Re: GNOME Games source name

That being said, I would prefer Bastien's suggestion of renaming the downstream packages as "gnome-games-app" (leaving the upstream as "gnome-games"). It seems like a decent middle ground where everybody can be happy. Adrien Plazas Le jeu. 2 juin 2016 à 14:30, Adrien Plazas

Re: Re: GNOME Games source name

It may sound like I'm against changing the application's name, but I'm not: I'm against changing it for a weaker name. The name should be short, catchy and describe well the application, unfortunately no other name suggested so far did all of these better than GNOME Games (GNOME Video Games

Re: GNOME Games source name

On 06/02/2016 02:01 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote: On Thu, 2016-06-02 at 13:34 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote: With my Fedora packager hat on, a rename would make it easier in Fedora land as well. Why? We have a @gnome-games package group, not a package; is it not possible for a package to have the

Re: GNOME Games source name

On Thu, 2016-06-02 at 13:03 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > Right, I hope we don't repeat that mistake. That name conflict is > rather painful and confusing. > Let's not repeat that if we can avoid it. > > Reading gnome-games, I expect a collection of games, thh. Given > Adrien's explanations, I

Re: GNOME Games source name

On Thu, 2016-06-02 at 13:34 +0200, Kalev Lember wrote: > With my Fedora packager hat on, a rename would make it easier in > Fedora > land as well. Why? We have a @gnome-games package group, not a package; is it not possible for a package to have the same name as a package group? Michael

Re: GNOME Games source name

On 06/02/2016 01:03 PM, Michael Biebl wrote: 2016-06-02 11:24 GMT+02:00 Bastien Nocera : gnome-games package in your distribution "gnome-games-app". There's already prior art in that case with epiphany, the web browser vs. the game. Right, I hope we don't repeat that

Re: GNOME Games source name

2016-06-02 11:24 GMT+02:00 Bastien Nocera : > gnome-games package in your distribution "gnome-games-app". There's > already prior art in that case with epiphany, the web browser vs. the > game. Right, I hope we don't repeat that mistake. That name conflict is rather painful and

Re: GNOME Games source name

On Wed, 2016-06-01 at 21:56 -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 7:47 AM, Adrien Plazas et> wrote: > > AFAIK the application is already distributed in Arch since 3.18 and > > as a > > Flatpak with the gnome-games name. > > No, it's not in Arch yet really.