Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evo svn head requires libgtkhtml-3.14 >= 3.16.0' but gtkhtml svn head is Version: 3.15.92
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 08:33 +0200, Jules Colding wrote: > On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 10:07 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 14:34 +0200, Jules Colding wrote: > > > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 08:23 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 12:11 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > > > > This also would do. But normally we would bump it during the next dot > > > > > release. Anyways is fine IMO. > > > > > > > > Hi Srini, > > > > > > > > I think we still have a misunderstanding here. The latest revision of > > > > Subversion trunk still has the version in configure.in at 3.15.92 and > > > > the latest ChangeLog entry is: > > > > > > > > 2007-09-03 Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > ** GtkHTML 3.15.92 release > > > > > > > > * NEWS, configure.in: > > > > > > > > But the latest ChangeLog entry in the 3.16.0 tarball is: > > > > > > > > 2007-09-17 Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > ** GtkHTML 3.16.0 release > > > > > > > > * NEWS: > > > > * configure.in: > > > > > > > > So it looks like at least the ChangeLog, NEWS, and configure.in changes > > > > prior to the 3.16.0 tarball upload were never committed. > > > > > > Which, BTW, is still the case for evolution (version 2.11.92 in svn) and > > > e-d-s (version 1.11.92 in svn). The changes up to and including x.12.0 > > > must still be on someones disk. > > > > It is there in gnome-2-20 branch as well. It isn't there in trunk. > > So the gnome-2-20 branch is further along than trunk? Not exactly. Just that it wasn't committed here and now it is just there. -Srini. > ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evo svn head requires libgtkhtml-3.14 >= 3.16.0' but gtkhtml svn head is Version: 3.15.92
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 10:07 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 14:34 +0200, Jules Colding wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 08:23 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > > > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 12:11 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > > > This also would do. But normally we would bump it during the next dot > > > > release. Anyways is fine IMO. > > > > > > Hi Srini, > > > > > > I think we still have a misunderstanding here. The latest revision of > > > Subversion trunk still has the version in configure.in at 3.15.92 and > > > the latest ChangeLog entry is: > > > > > > 2007-09-03 Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > ** GtkHTML 3.15.92 release > > > > > > * NEWS, configure.in: > > > > > > But the latest ChangeLog entry in the 3.16.0 tarball is: > > > > > > 2007-09-17 Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > ** GtkHTML 3.16.0 release > > > > > > * NEWS: > > > * configure.in: > > > > > > So it looks like at least the ChangeLog, NEWS, and configure.in changes > > > prior to the 3.16.0 tarball upload were never committed. > > > > Which, BTW, is still the case for evolution (version 2.11.92 in svn) and > > e-d-s (version 1.11.92 in svn). The changes up to and including x.12.0 > > must still be on someones disk. > > It is there in gnome-2-20 branch as well. It isn't there in trunk. So the gnome-2-20 branch is further along than trunk? -- jules ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evo svn head requires libgtkhtml-3.14 >= 3.16.0' but gtkhtml svn head is Version: 3.15.92
On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 08:23 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 12:11 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > This also would do. But normally we would bump it during the next dot > > release. Anyways is fine IMO. > > Hi Srini, > > I think we still have a misunderstanding here. The latest revision of > Subversion trunk still has the version in configure.in at 3.15.92 and > the latest ChangeLog entry is: > > 2007-09-03 Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ** GtkHTML 3.15.92 release > > * NEWS, configure.in: > > But the latest ChangeLog entry in the 3.16.0 tarball is: > > 2007-09-17 Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ** GtkHTML 3.16.0 release > > * NEWS: > * configure.in: > > So it looks like at least the ChangeLog, NEWS, and configure.in changes > prior to the 3.16.0 tarball upload were never committed. Yeah not to trunk. Got it. It was done just to gnome-2-20 branch only. > > Hopefully this clears things up. I can commit the differences between > the released tarball and Subversion trunk if you'd like. Feel free to do that. -Srini. > > Matthew Barnes > ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evo svn head requires libgtkhtml-3.14 >= 3.16.0' but gtkhtml svn head is Version: 3.15.92
On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 14:34 +0200, Jules Colding wrote: > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 08:23 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 12:11 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > > This also would do. But normally we would bump it during the next dot > > > release. Anyways is fine IMO. > > > > Hi Srini, > > > > I think we still have a misunderstanding here. The latest revision of > > Subversion trunk still has the version in configure.in at 3.15.92 and > > the latest ChangeLog entry is: > > > > 2007-09-03 Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > ** GtkHTML 3.15.92 release > > > > * NEWS, configure.in: > > > > But the latest ChangeLog entry in the 3.16.0 tarball is: > > > > 2007-09-17 Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > ** GtkHTML 3.16.0 release > > > > * NEWS: > > * configure.in: > > > > So it looks like at least the ChangeLog, NEWS, and configure.in changes > > prior to the 3.16.0 tarball upload were never committed. > > Which, BTW, is still the case for evolution (version 2.11.92 in svn) and > e-d-s (version 1.11.92 in svn). The changes up to and including x.12.0 > must still be on someones disk. It is there in gnome-2-20 branch as well. It isn't there in trunk. -Srini. > > Please commit. > > Thanks, > jules > > ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evo svn head requires libgtkhtml-3.14 >= 3.16.0' but gtkhtml svn head is Version: 3.15.92
On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 08:23 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 12:11 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > This also would do. But normally we would bump it during the next dot > > release. Anyways is fine IMO. > > Hi Srini, > > I think we still have a misunderstanding here. The latest revision of > Subversion trunk still has the version in configure.in at 3.15.92 and > the latest ChangeLog entry is: > > 2007-09-03 Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ** GtkHTML 3.15.92 release > > * NEWS, configure.in: > > But the latest ChangeLog entry in the 3.16.0 tarball is: > > 2007-09-17 Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ** GtkHTML 3.16.0 release > > * NEWS: > * configure.in: > > So it looks like at least the ChangeLog, NEWS, and configure.in changes > prior to the 3.16.0 tarball upload were never committed. Which, BTW, is still the case for evolution (version 2.11.92 in svn) and e-d-s (version 1.11.92 in svn). The changes up to and including x.12.0 must still be on someones disk. Please commit. Thanks, jules ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evo svn head requires libgtkhtml-3.14 >= 3.16.0' but gtkhtml svn head is Version: 3.15.92
On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 12:11 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > This also would do. But normally we would bump it during the next dot > release. Anyways is fine IMO. Hi Srini, I think we still have a misunderstanding here. The latest revision of Subversion trunk still has the version in configure.in at 3.15.92 and the latest ChangeLog entry is: 2007-09-03 Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ** GtkHTML 3.15.92 release * NEWS, configure.in: But the latest ChangeLog entry in the 3.16.0 tarball is: 2007-09-17 Srinivasa Ragavan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ** GtkHTML 3.16.0 release * NEWS: * configure.in: So it looks like at least the ChangeLog, NEWS, and configure.in changes prior to the 3.16.0 tarball upload were never committed. Hopefully this clears things up. I can commit the differences between the released tarball and Subversion trunk if you'd like. Matthew Barnes ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evo svn head requires libgtkhtml-3.14 >= 3.16.0' but gtkhtml svn head is Version: 3.15.92
Matthew, This also would do. But normally we would bump it during the next dot release. Anyways is fine IMO. -Srini. On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 14:10 -0400, Matthew Barnes wrote: > On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 23:03 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > > The version bump normally happens during the first unstable release in > > the trunk. I'm wondering how is it that it is requesting for > 3.14. > > > > Ah, I remember, I approved a patch for gnome-2-20 branch and asked to > > commit to head also (I think so). For now I can revert till the first > > unstable release/version bump happens. > > I'm confused. This is what needs to change in GtkHtml's configure.in: > >-AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE($PACKAGE, 3.15.92) >+AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE($PACKAGE, 3.16.0) > > to satisfy this already-committed change to Evolution's configure.in: > >-m4_define([libgtkhtml_minimum_version], [3.14.0]) >+m4_define([libgtkhtml_minimum_version], [3.16.0]) > > The bump in requirements is due to GtkHtml's new printing API. > > Matthew Barnes > > ___ > Evolution-hackers mailing list > Evolution-hackers@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evo svn head requires libgtkhtml-3.14 >= 3.16.0' but gtkhtml svn head is Version: 3.15.92
On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 23:03 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan wrote: > The version bump normally happens during the first unstable release in > the trunk. I'm wondering how is it that it is requesting for > 3.14. > > Ah, I remember, I approved a patch for gnome-2-20 branch and asked to > commit to head also (I think so). For now I can revert till the first > unstable release/version bump happens. I'm confused. This is what needs to change in GtkHtml's configure.in: -AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE($PACKAGE, 3.15.92) +AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE($PACKAGE, 3.16.0) to satisfy this already-committed change to Evolution's configure.in: -m4_define([libgtkhtml_minimum_version], [3.14.0]) +m4_define([libgtkhtml_minimum_version], [3.16.0]) The bump in requirements is due to GtkHtml's new printing API. Matthew Barnes ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
Re: [Evolution-hackers] Evo svn head requires libgtkhtml-3.14 >= 3.16.0' but gtkhtml svn head is Version: 3.15.92
The version bump normally happens during the first unstable release in the trunk. I'm wondering how is it that it is requesting for > 3.14. Ah, I remember, I approved a patch for gnome-2-20 branch and asked to commit to head also (I think so). For now I can revert till the first unstable release/version bump happens. -Srini. On Mon, 2007-09-24 at 10:58 -0400, Reid Thompson wrote: > Will gtkhtml be bumped soon? > Is there a 'usual' way around this? > ___ > Evolution-hackers mailing list > Evolution-hackers@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers ___ Evolution-hackers mailing list Evolution-hackers@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
