Greetings,
I am trying to build gnome desktop using jhbuild and hitting an error below:
make[2]: Entering directory
`/tmp/checkout/gnome/gobject-introspection-0.6.7/gir'
Makefile:851: *** Need to define GLib_2_0_gir_LIBS or GLib_2_0_gir_PROGRAM.
Stop.
make[2]: Leaving directory
I'm about ready to push my gsettings branch of gnome-power-manager
into master. The only remaining bits to port is the set default
button which sets the per-user settings for all users. This used to
work using the DBus interface of GConf (the policykit helper), but I'm
unsure on how to port this
Le mercredi 02 juin 2010 à 22:08 +0200, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen a
écrit :
snip
My proposal is to let us inspire by the Apache Incubator idea[1],
making app inclusion a two stage process. Mature in the Gnome
Incubator and then when the project is mature and well maintained it
gets the honour
Le mercredi 02 juin 2010 à 00:37 +0100, Lucas Rocha a écrit :
3. Create a moduleset to hold our highly recommended libraries such GStreamer,
e-d-s, and others. This moduleset will be called Extended Platform.
This is very good news!
What's the procedure to propose module to this new moduleset?
On 3 June 2010 11:26, Milan Bouchet-Valat nalimi...@club.fr wrote:
Le mercredi 02 juin 2010 à 22:08 +0200, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen a
écrit :
snip
My proposal is to let us inspire by the Apache Incubator idea[1],
making app inclusion a two stage process. Mature in the Gnome
Incubator and
On 18/05/10 17:33, Johannes Schmid wrote:
Hi!
The ultimate goal is being able to automatically detect at link time
that program A requires library B implementing at least version X of
the interface and embedding such information in packages
automatically. Just like we do for glibc with its
Ryan,
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:09:15PM -0400, Ryan Lortie wrote:
GLib 2.25.7 is now available [...]
I've tried to cross compile glib-2.25.7, and it crashes in gio/tests,
because compiles glib-compile-schemas for the host system, but tries
to run it later on the build machine.
The patch below
Sorry for replying out of thread - i've been following the discussion from web.
As one of the apps (project hamster) that prolly will fall out of the
category, wanted to share my sentiment.
Project hamster being part of GNOME means many things to me and there
are many benefits:
* promotion -
Hallo
I'm the Danish translation coordinator, and we were encouraged to chip
in on this discussion, so I will ;)
Most of arguments for needing a change and the proposed solution are
just fine by med. But there is one point where I very much disagree.
It concerns not including the extra relevant
Can you please elaborate why GAJ was not accepted...
We are still clueless :)
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 12:56 AM, Thorsten Prante thors...@prante.eu wrote:
Purpose:
GNOME Activity Journal is not a File Browser but an Activity Browser.
It uses the Zeitgeist Framework to display what you did
Ok, since you dragged i18n inside, let me add a few of my thoughts
from non strict devel side.
1. Reorganization is a must! Maybe a bit wider than proposed, but the
path is right. I'd fork every moduleset to Core and Extra.
- Desktop Apps Core (obviously the core, simpler apps that do the task) *
Am Donnerstag, den 03.06.2010, 12:42 +0200 schrieb Seif Lotfy:
Can you please elaborate why GAJ was not accepted...
Wrong thread?
Plus you = release-team?
andre
--
mailto:ak...@gmx.net | failed
http://www.iomc.de/ | http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper
The idea behind the Activity Journal was both misinterpreted or
misrepresented. Some where along the line people began to think
zeitgeist features around the desktop was the goal of the Activity
Journal, however the Activity Journal is really a centralized event
browser not a collective project.
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:15 AM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm about ready to push my gsettings branch of gnome-power-manager
into master. The only remaining bits to port is the set default
button which sets the per-user settings for all users. This used to
work using the DBus
I recall that the framework was desireable, but a lot of the features of GAJ
could be sucked into Nautilus and possibly we don't need a separate app.
Again this is just from memory, (in a conf, dont' have time to look it up
but wanted to chime in) but I'm sure someone from the release team can
On 2 Jun 2010, at 22:04, Johannes Schmid wrote:
I really support Tristan's idea of a restarted review process. This is
time consuming but it is rather easy to do on the organsation and
infrastructure level. It may or may not be more strict but it would also
help to ensure we have some
Am Donnerstag, den 03.06.2010, 16:02 +0100 schrieb Calum Benson:
http://developer.gnome.org/gep/gep-0.html
...and the guidelines that currently exist:
http://live.gnome.org/ReleasePlanning/ModuleProposing
andre
--
mailto:ak...@gmx.net | failed
http://www.iomc.de/ |
On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 10:30 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:15 AM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote:
The only remaining bits to port is the set default
button which sets the per-user settings for all users. I'm
unsure on how to port this in
On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 17:40 +0200, Ryan Lortie wrote:
On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 10:30 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 5:15 AM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote:
The only remaining bits to port is the set default
button which sets the per-user settings
Hi!
I was wondering what kind of schema paths should adopt during the
migration to GSettings. Old GConf paths feel really lame, since we
basically put everything into /apps, with a few general settings going
to /desktop. Only /system really makes sense. This reminds people of the
horrid Windows
Hi !
Le 24/05/2010 23:37, joshua...@comcast.net a écrit :
The other thing I want to do
is connect with developers, I don't really know anyone that likes to
write GNOME software, and I think I'd learn faster if I did.
Well, IMHO, the first step is to read http://planet.gnome.org, which
21 matches
Mail list logo
