Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
2008/6/6 Mateusz Biliński [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Stephan Erb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We should schedule a meeting to discuss actions. We must decide on what to do, who does it and when it should be done. Proposal: Wed. 11.07.2008 - 22:00 GMT. Any objections? Steve-e, you really mean 11th of July 2008? It's not Wednesday, it's Friday then. But 11th of June is Wednesday... Here's reply from Steve-e: --- From: Stephan Erb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2008 08:31:47 +0200 Ah, well Yes I meant June, and yes it was intended to move the time. But this is only a proposal, I just wanted to get things going. --- -- Mateusz Biliński ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
I should have better used a more common timezone. Wed. 11.07.2008 20:00 UTC (22:00 CEST) For those people like me see [1] :-) Thanks js. [1] http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 10:08 +0200, Stephan Erb wrote: We should schedule a meeting to discuss actions. We must decide on what to do, who does it and when it should be done. Proposal: Wed. 11.07.2008 - 22:00 GMT. Any objections? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
Well, you know that you moved the time now? Was that intended? 22 GMT is not 22 CEST :D. -- Jonathan signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Stephan Erb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We should schedule a meeting to discuss actions. We must decide on what to do, who does it and when it should be done. Proposal: Wed. 11.07.2008 - 22:00 GMT. Any objections? Steve-e, you really mean 11th of July 2008? It's not Wednesday, it's Friday then. But 11th of June is Wednesday... -- Mateusz Biliński ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
On Mon, 2008-05-26 at 11:42 +0300, Nikos Kouremenos wrote: imHo Gajim should release a good version this summer else it's likely it will lose users to other clients. And that means no refactoring it just means Release early, release often Release early, release often... We are already beyond that point. But we are aware that we must release ASAP. This means that started things need to be finished and new features must not be worked on. (That is why I disagreed merging otr) We should decide know what needs to be done and what can be dropped. Finishing all is impossible regarding our very limited spare time. (:-/) Kind Regards, Steve signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
I am of the opinion that we should remove code from gajim if we know that it is not fully functional. Removing should be preferred over disabling it because we can never be sure that there aren't any uncaught side effects. It may also happen that some user enable it and report bugs in other areas (yes, code is that coupled) and we are unable to easily reproduce it. After removal the patches could be applied to separate branches. Users who really want it can use it and we make sure that the patch doesn't get lost. On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 12:55 +0200, Jonathan Schleifer wrote: Stephan Erb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When I look at gajim, I see the following broken windows: - OSX integration It's totally broken and I'm for reverting it and doing it from scratch. See above. - OTR-Encryption We can keep that in trunk and just remove the line that loads the OTR module before release. It's possible that we get it fixed, but I really doubt it, See explanation above. - GPG-Encryption What's broken about GPG? Never had any issues with it. I was not precise enough here. It is working but the implementation is very complex, so no refactoring for 0.12 is planned. But you forgot the biggest breakage: Session centric. I am OK with session centric and think we should definitely keep it. Things are shaping up and I haven't seen any big breakage in the last days. (Even unit tests are coming). Best Regards, steve-e signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
I'd suggest that we branch in about 1 months and only add fixes to that branch then. If we'd use Mercurial instead of SVN, things would be much easier :/. A decentral VCS would be better anyway. -- Jonathan signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
Hallöchen! Jonathan Schleifer writes: Torsten Bronger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any reason for waiting another month? Yes, it's not very useful to branch when it's not in a usable state. ATM, we need too fix a lot to make it usable again, too much was changed at once, for example the roster, session-centric, etc. I use the SVN version and it is, well, not perfect but usable for everyday use. I think that the decision for a clean-up towards a release is the perfect moment for creating a release branch. If sensible/necessary, you can merge the fixes of it back into the trunk after all. Tschö, Torsten. -- Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (See http://ime.webhop.org for further contact info.) ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
Jonathan Schleifer wrote: Torsten Bronger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any reason for waiting another month? Yes, it's not very useful to branch when it's not in a usable state. ATM, we need too fix a lot to make it usable again, too much was changed at once, for example the roster, session-centric, etc. I don't see any problem for now with session-centric things. But I see some with modelfilter. The major annoying thing for mw is that collapsed groups auto-expand .. I don't know why, when .. I have 2 busy weeks, then it must be more quiet for me. -- Yann ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
Nikos Kouremenos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: no svn is more than fine. centralization is good for managing software such as Gajim. Gajim is not Mozilla nor Apache I *STRONGLY* disagree. Ever tried to work with SVN when you're in a train with your laptop, without any WLAN? You're screwed then. With mercurial, no problem at all. Just commit offline and push (and merge, if needed) when you come online again, no problem at all. With svn, you can't work offline. So, centralized VCS are *BAD*, *BAD* and *BAD*! -- Jonathan signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
It's ok to disagree and let's not go off topic. ;P I like SVN because it pushes you to commit online. I don't like keep branches for a long time either. I like all in one place. it works better because of psycology reasons I think :) On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:40 PM, Jonathan Schleifer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nikos Kouremenos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: no svn is more than fine. centralization is good for managing software such as Gajim. Gajim is not Mozilla nor Apache I *STRONGLY* disagree. Ever tried to work with SVN when you're in a train with your laptop, without any WLAN? You're screwed then. With mercurial, no problem at all. Just commit offline and push (and merge, if needed) when you come online again, no problem at all. With svn, you can't work offline. So, centralized VCS are *BAD*, *BAD* and *BAD*! -- Jonathan ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 23:27 +0300, Nikos Kouremenos wrote: than fine. centralization is good for managing software such as Gajim. Gajim is not Mozilla nor Apache Even with DVCS you maintain a centralized repo. It is just that merging and branching is much easier. IMHO it would make it easier for new people to come on board but lets discuss this some other time. also on branching some features and then let the users follow that branch: I used to say and I really hope it's still that way: Gajim is for you grandma My grandma won't notice when a buggy feature that she would have never used is gone. But there are more advanced users that will notice. We must not scare them away by simply dropping a patch that was once in trunk. We must provide options. ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 06:50:40PM +0200, Jonathan Schleifer wrote: If we'd use Mercurial instead of SVN, things would be much easier :/. A decentral VCS would be better anyway. I'm also a big DVCS fan. SVN makes branching (and merging) very painful. I'm using (and liking) git-svn with Gajim, but ideally it would be DVCS from end-to-end. pgpIhUjkqR4Om.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
Hallöchen! Jonathan Schleifer writes: Nikos Kouremenos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: no svn is more than fine. centralization is good for managing software such as Gajim. Gajim is not Mozilla nor Apache I *STRONGLY* disagree. Ever tried to work with SVN when you're in a train with your laptop, without any WLAN? You're screwed then. With mercurial, no problem at all. Just commit offline and push (and merge, if needed) when you come online again, no problem at all. Most DVCS's allow for pulling from an SVN as well as pushing to it. And then, there is SVK. Tschö, Torsten. -- Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (See http://ime.webhop.org for further contact info.) ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
Re: [Gajim-devel] Fixing Broken Windows
Stephan Erb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When I look at gajim, I see the following broken windows: - OSX integration It's totally broken and I'm for reverting it and doing it from scratch. - OTR-Encryption We can keep that in trunk and just remove the line that loads the OTR module before release. It's possible that we get it fixed, but I really doubt it, - GPG-Encryption What's broken about GPG? Never had any issues with it. But you forgot the biggest breakage: Session centric. Since the merge of session centric, nearly nothing works correctly anymore. I often have 5 chat tabs with one person, random crashes, etc. If we keep session centric in, I don't expect a release before 2009. There is still so much to fix. bct sure did a lot of great work here, but it looks to me that this is just too complex. And I don't see any advantage we get from it, besides tictactoe which isn't even a XEP and will never get one because it uses messages instead of iq, since there is no other client supporting it yet - and I guess for good reasons. -- Jonathan signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Gajim-devel mailing list Gajim-devel@gajim.org https://lists.gajim.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/gajim-devel
