Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hey, On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:51:54PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Hi > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 6:12 PM Christophe Fergeau > wrote: > > I think the main objection is with making spicy too easy to install (and > > to upgrade). Once we ask someone to test a spicy flatpak and it works > > for them, we don't want them to stick to it, start requesting for > > flathub availability so that it gets regularly updated, and for this one > > small feature that would make spicy a perfect fit for them (which is why > > in the first place Marc-André has been trying to discourage use of > > spicy). > > > > Indeed. So far it is there as an "example": > > commit 64a0eeab8ddd2ca6b2d3b57b7f46e99877bfab7e > Author: Pavel Grunt > Date: Fri Jul 21 11:02:57 2017 +0200 > > Add flatpak builder manifest file for spicy > > To give an example for creating flatpaks depending on spice-gtk > > > Tbh, I think we should remove the flatpak from spice-gtk source tree. > It doesn't make much sense to have it included imho, unless we have a > good reason to build it on a regular basis, which imho is not > something we need as a library or even a testing client. Is there a repository of flatpak build snippets these days? If not, I think it can be useful to document a canonical way of building spice-gtk in a flatpak, rather than having every application build spice-gtk in its own way. Christophe signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hi On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 6:12 PM Christophe Fergeau wrote: > I think the main objection is with making spicy too easy to install (and > to upgrade). Once we ask someone to test a spicy flatpak and it works > for them, we don't want them to stick to it, start requesting for > flathub availability so that it gets regularly updated, and for this one > small feature that would make spicy a perfect fit for them (which is why > in the first place Marc-André has been trying to discourage use of > spicy). > Indeed. So far it is there as an "example": commit 64a0eeab8ddd2ca6b2d3b57b7f46e99877bfab7e Author: Pavel Grunt Date: Fri Jul 21 11:02:57 2017 +0200 Add flatpak builder manifest file for spicy To give an example for creating flatpaks depending on spice-gtk Tbh, I think we should remove the flatpak from spice-gtk source tree. It doesn't make much sense to have it included imho, unless we have a good reason to build it on a regular basis, which imho is not something we need as a library or even a testing client. -- Marc-André Lureau ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 05:03:45PM +0100, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > Hey, > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 03:08:36PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > I am concern about distributing spice-gtk and spicy in new forms in > > general. The .desktop is pretty much a no-go to me. The flatpak I > > don't really understand what we need / want it for. > > I believe this is the main question to answer to move forward with that > thread, what is the intended use case/who are the intended users of this > spicy flatpak? For people hacking on spice-gtk, building manually from > git will probably be faster/quicker. For people hitting bugs in > virt-viewer/virt-manager/gnome boxes, asking them to try with a spicy > flatpak is going to be less convenient than having a virt-viewer or > boxes flatpak. > So it's also not fully clear to be for which purpose this > flatpak will be used. Flatkpak is a installable. The goal is to install a testing branch, wip. You can have those installed in parallel, which makes easier to compare fixes/etc. You can easily share that with users that are not knowledgable with building source code to check if a given patch solves the problem for them (or if given git:master has or not the bug from them), this is distro agnostic. I don't really want to do marketing for Flatpak here. What's the trouble anyway if no one but one or two people use this? Spicy and the flatpak is already in our source code for so long but now it seems like an issue to make it easy to install it. signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 04:29:49PM +, Victor Toso wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 05:03:45PM +0100, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > > Hey, > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 03:08:36PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > I am concern about distributing spice-gtk and spicy in new forms in > > > general. The .desktop is pretty much a no-go to me. The flatpak I > > > don't really understand what we need / want it for. > > > > I believe this is the main question to answer to move forward with that > > thread, what is the intended use case/who are the intended users of this > > spicy flatpak? For people hacking on spice-gtk, building manually from > > git will probably be faster/quicker. For people hitting bugs in > > virt-viewer/virt-manager/gnome boxes, asking them to try with a spicy > > flatpak is going to be less convenient than having a virt-viewer or > > boxes flatpak. > > So it's also not fully clear to be for which purpose this > > flatpak will be used. > > Flatkpak is a installable. The goal is to install a testing > branch, wip. You can have those installed in parallel, which > makes easier to compare fixes/etc. You can easily share that with > users that are not knowledgable with building source code to > check if a given patch solves the problem for them (or if given > git:master has or not the bug from them), this is distro > agnostic. The 'distro agnostic' part could be a problem fwiw ;) the bug could be fixed by the flatpak, but just because the gtk+/... version is different rather than because of the changes you did in spice-gtk. Not really important at this point though. > > I don't really want to do marketing for Flatpak here. What's the > trouble anyway if no one but one or two people use this? Spicy > and the flatpak is already in our source code for so long but now > it seems like an issue to make it easy to install it. I think the main objection is with making spicy too easy to install (and to upgrade). Once we ask someone to test a spicy flatpak and it works for them, we don't want them to stick to it, start requesting for flathub availability so that it gets regularly updated, and for this one small feature that would make spicy a perfect fit for them (which is why in the first place Marc-André has been trying to discourage use of spicy). Christophe signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hey, On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 03:08:36PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > I am concern about distributing spice-gtk and spicy in new forms in > general. The .desktop is pretty much a no-go to me. The flatpak I > don't really understand what we need / want it for. I believe this is the main question to answer to move forward with that thread, what is the intended use case/who are the intended users of this spicy flatpak? For people hacking on spice-gtk, building manually from git will probably be faster/quicker. For people hitting bugs in virt-viewer/virt-manager/gnome boxes, asking them to try with a spicy flatpak is going to be less convenient than having a virt-viewer or boxes flatpak. So it's also not fully clear to be for which purpose this flatpak will be used. Christophe signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hi, On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 03:08:36PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > 1.1 MB. To avoid waste of space, the flatkpak is not generated > > automatically but manually, that is, you have to click on this > > 'job' in the CI to activate it; besides that, the artifact is set > > to expire_in: 2 days > > Ok, I don't see much point in having it built in the CI then You know, this is all configurable. I did this way only because main goal is to use spicy for testing, nothing else :) > > > virt-viewer with only --enable-spice-gtk shouldn't have much more > > > dependencies though. > > > > > > If I add virt-viewer -> flatpak or msi installer to gitlab-ci's > > > > artifacts, that's out of scope of spice-gtk although I'll be > > > > using it all the time... > > > > > > Oh you are thinking about building virt-viewer from spice-gtk CI? > > > interesting... I wonder if there are mechanisms already to trigger > > > rebuilds of dependent projects, I am pretty sure there are > > > solutions to that. And flatpak build can pull from upstream > > > repository master I guess. > > > > My interest is testing spice/spice-gtk only. So, to regenerate > > virt-viewer flatpak from spice-gtk CI because there is a new > > commit in virt-viewer is totally out of context, for me. > > No, but your interest seems to have a flatpak readily available when > doing a commit in spice-gtk. Just need to remove `when: manual` from flatpak job of .gitlab-ci and we would achieve that. > > I'd be glad if virt-viewer was in gitlab, close to no knowledge > > around Pagure infra. > > > > I still don't know if your earlier concern around .desktop is due > > the fact we are installing it (patch 04/10) or with spicy > > flatkpak itself. > > I am concern about distributing spice-gtk and spicy in new forms in > general. The .desktop is pretty much a no-go to me. The flatpak I > don't really understand what we need / want it for. ... signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hi On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 2:57 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:44:23PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > Hi > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 2:21 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:06:19PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 1:59 PM Victor Toso > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:09:41PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > > > > > Having a virt-viewer flatpak does not mean _not_ having a > > > > > > > spicy.flatkpak (to me); one is full featured spice client while > > > > > > > the other a testing tool... > > > > > > > > > > > > It looks like a lot of duplication of flatpak effort. Maybe you > > > > > > could > > > > > > simply ship spicy in virt-viewer flatpak, so it could be run from > > > > > > command line (please no .desktop) > > > > > > > > > > Is the fact that we are installing a .desktop for spicy the only > > > > > issue here or you don't want to see a flatpak of spicy in the > > > > > gitlab-ci anyway? (btw, I'm not planning to upload this to any > > > > > flatpak provider). > > > > > > > > What's the point in building a spice-gtk flatpak then, when you > > > > have virt-viewer flatpak? > > > > > > You replied my question with another question. > > > > > > My main motivation is that spicy is self contained in spice-gtk, > > > smaller and targeted to be a testing tool, so, testing spice-gtk > > > changes. > > > > I see, you would like CI build version readily available. > > As you can see by browsing the link in the cover letter > > > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/victortoso/spice-gtk/-/jobs/105184/artifacts/browse > > > (kind of a waste of space to me, but it may be useful) > > 1.1 MB. To avoid waste of space, the flatkpak is not generated > automatically but manually, that is, you have to click on this > 'job' in the CI to activate it; besides that, the artifact is set > to expire_in: 2 days Ok, I don't see much point in having it built in the CI then > > > virt-viewer with only --enable-spice-gtk shouldn't have much more > > dependencies though. > > > > If I add virt-viewer -> flatpak or msi installer to gitlab-ci's > > > artifacts, that's out of scope of spice-gtk although I'll be > > > using it all the time... > > > > Oh you are thinking about building virt-viewer from spice-gtk CI? > > interesting... I wonder if there are mechanisms already to trigger > > rebuilds of dependent projects, I am pretty sure there are > > solutions to that. And flatpak build can pull from upstream > > repository master I guess. > > My interest is testing spice/spice-gtk only. So, to regenerate > virt-viewer flatpak from spice-gtk CI because there is a new > commit in virt-viewer is totally out of context, for me. No, but your interest seems to have a flatpak readily available when doing a commit in spice-gtk. > > I'd be glad if virt-viewer was in gitlab, close to no knowledge > around Pagure infra. > > I still don't know if your earlier concern around .desktop is due > the fact we are installing it (patch 04/10) or with spicy > flatkpak itself. I am concern about distributing spice-gtk and spicy in new forms in general. The .desktop is pretty much a no-go to me. The flatpak I don't really understand what we need / want it for. -- Marc-André Lureau ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:44:23PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Hi > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 2:21 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:06:19PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 1:59 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:09:41PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > > > > Having a virt-viewer flatpak does not mean _not_ having a > > > > > > spicy.flatkpak (to me); one is full featured spice client while > > > > > > the other a testing tool... > > > > > > > > > > It looks like a lot of duplication of flatpak effort. Maybe you could > > > > > simply ship spicy in virt-viewer flatpak, so it could be run from > > > > > command line (please no .desktop) > > > > > > > > Is the fact that we are installing a .desktop for spicy the only > > > > issue here or you don't want to see a flatpak of spicy in the > > > > gitlab-ci anyway? (btw, I'm not planning to upload this to any > > > > flatpak provider). > > > > > > What's the point in building a spice-gtk flatpak then, when you > > > have virt-viewer flatpak? > > > > You replied my question with another question. > > > > My main motivation is that spicy is self contained in spice-gtk, > > smaller and targeted to be a testing tool, so, testing spice-gtk > > changes. > > I see, you would like CI build version readily available. As you can see by browsing the link in the cover letter https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/victortoso/spice-gtk/-/jobs/105184/artifacts/browse > (kind of a waste of space to me, but it may be useful) 1.1 MB. To avoid waste of space, the flatkpak is not generated automatically but manually, that is, you have to click on this 'job' in the CI to activate it; besides that, the artifact is set to expire_in: 2 days > virt-viewer with only --enable-spice-gtk shouldn't have much more > dependencies though. > > If I add virt-viewer -> flatpak or msi installer to gitlab-ci's > > artifacts, that's out of scope of spice-gtk although I'll be > > using it all the time... > > Oh you are thinking about building virt-viewer from spice-gtk CI? > interesting... I wonder if there are mechanisms already to trigger > rebuilds of dependent projects, I am pretty sure there are > solutions to that. And flatpak build can pull from upstream > repository master I guess. My interest is testing spice/spice-gtk only. So, to regenerate virt-viewer flatpak from spice-gtk CI because there is a new commit in virt-viewer is totally out of context, for me. I'd be glad if virt-viewer was in gitlab, close to no knowledge around Pagure infra. I still don't know if your earlier concern around .desktop is due the fact we are installing it (patch 04/10) or with spicy flatkpak itself. Cheers, signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hi On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 2:21 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:06:19PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > Hi > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 1:59 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:09:41PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > > > Having a virt-viewer flatpak does not mean _not_ having a > > > > > spicy.flatkpak (to me); one is full featured spice client while > > > > > the other a testing tool... > > > > > > > > It looks like a lot of duplication of flatpak effort. Maybe you could > > > > simply ship spicy in virt-viewer flatpak, so it could be run from > > > > command line (please no .desktop) > > > > > > Is the fact that we are installing a .desktop for spicy the only > > > issue here or you don't want to see a flatpak of spicy in the > > > gitlab-ci anyway? (btw, I'm not planning to upload this to any > > > flatpak provider). > > > > What's the point in building a spice-gtk flatpak then, when you > > have virt-viewer flatpak? > > You replied my question with another question. > > My main motivation is that spicy is self contained in spice-gtk, > smaller and targeted to be a testing tool, so, testing spice-gtk > changes. I see, you would like CI build version readily available. (kind of a waste of space to me, but it may be useful) virt-viewer with only --enable-spice-gtk shouldn't have much more dependencies though. > If I add virt-viewer -> flatpak or msi installer to gitlab-ci's > artifacts, that's out of scope of spice-gtk although I'll be > using it all the time... Oh you are thinking about building virt-viewer from spice-gtk CI? interesting... I wonder if there are mechanisms already to trigger rebuilds of dependent projects, I am pretty sure there are solutions to that. And flatpak build can pull from upstream repository master I guess. -- Marc-André Lureau ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hi, On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:06:19PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Hi > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 1:59 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:09:41PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > > Having a virt-viewer flatpak does not mean _not_ having a > > > > spicy.flatkpak (to me); one is full featured spice client while > > > > the other a testing tool... > > > > > > It looks like a lot of duplication of flatpak effort. Maybe you could > > > simply ship spicy in virt-viewer flatpak, so it could be run from > > > command line (please no .desktop) > > > > Is the fact that we are installing a .desktop for spicy the only > > issue here or you don't want to see a flatpak of spicy in the > > gitlab-ci anyway? (btw, I'm not planning to upload this to any > > flatpak provider). > > What's the point in building a spice-gtk flatpak then, when you > have virt-viewer flatpak? You replied my question with another question. My main motivation is that spicy is self contained in spice-gtk, smaller and targeted to be a testing tool, so, testing spice-gtk changes. If I add virt-viewer -> flatpak or msi installer to gitlab-ci's artifacts, that's out of scope of spice-gtk although I'll be using it all the time... signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hi On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 1:59 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:09:41PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > Having a virt-viewer flatpak does not mean _not_ having a > > > spicy.flatkpak (to me); one is full featured spice client while > > > the other a testing tool... > > > > It looks like a lot of duplication of flatpak effort. Maybe you could > > simply ship spicy in virt-viewer flatpak, so it could be run from > > command line (please no .desktop) > > Is the fact that we are installing a .desktop for spicy the only > issue here or you don't want to see a flatpak of spicy in the > gitlab-ci anyway? (btw, I'm not planning to upload this to any > flatpak provider). What's the point in building a spice-gtk flatpak then, when you have virt-viewer flatpak? -- Marc-André Lureau ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hi, On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:09:41PM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > Having a virt-viewer flatpak does not mean _not_ having a > > spicy.flatkpak (to me); one is full featured spice client while > > the other a testing tool... > > It looks like a lot of duplication of flatpak effort. Maybe you could > simply ship spicy in virt-viewer flatpak, so it could be run from > command line (please no .desktop) Is the fact that we are installing a .desktop for spicy the only issue here or you don't want to see a flatpak of spicy in the gitlab-ci anyway? (btw, I'm not planning to upload this to any flatpak provider). signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hi On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 1:01 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:17:26AM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > Hi > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 9:55 AM Victor Toso wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 11:45:18AM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 7:32 PM Victor Toso > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > From: Victor Toso > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > Trying to improve and integrate flatpak for spicy together with > > > > > gitlab-ci. I hope the changes here makes sense to you. > > > > > > > > Please do not distribute spicy. I wonder why it is still > > > > installed! > > > > > > > > We had several issues with end-users that we don't want to > > > > address in spicy, there are enough clients out there. > > > > > > It is a testing tool and we promote it as such. What's the > > > problem? > > > > > > > We don't want end-users to use it, so distributing it could > > lead to wrong assumptions. > > I'm always inclined to use spicy for *testing*, adding new UI > there to tweak things that is not expected to a normal spice > client to have. > > > > > the desktop file for spicy was removed in commit > > > > 62a077978b78d8ec49e6f797d418fff567ce4532. > > > > > > Yes, installing it can be avoided as, for me, the goal is to have > > > it shipped with the flatpak bundle. Still, while promoting it as > > > a testing tool, not sure what's the problem on shipping that. > > > > Why not focus on virt-viewer flatpak instead? > > I'm completely in favor in working on something like that but I > would rather do it with gnome-boxes instead as I can add > (nightly) qemu, spice-protocol, spice, spice-gtk to a single > flatpak. > Boxes is a different beast. > Having a virt-viewer flatpak does not mean _not_ having a > spicy.flatkpak (to me); one is full featured spice client while > the other a testing tool... It looks like a lot of duplication of flatpak effort. Maybe you could simply ship spicy in virt-viewer flatpak, so it could be run from command line (please no .desktop) -- Marc-André Lureau ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hi, On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:17:26AM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Hi > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 9:55 AM Victor Toso wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 11:45:18AM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 7:32 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > > > > > > > From: Victor Toso > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Trying to improve and integrate flatpak for spicy together with > > > > gitlab-ci. I hope the changes here makes sense to you. > > > > > > Please do not distribute spicy. I wonder why it is still > > > installed! > > > > > > We had several issues with end-users that we don't want to > > > address in spicy, there are enough clients out there. > > > > It is a testing tool and we promote it as such. What's the > > problem? > > > > We don't want end-users to use it, so distributing it could > lead to wrong assumptions. I'm always inclined to use spicy for *testing*, adding new UI there to tweak things that is not expected to a normal spice client to have. > > > the desktop file for spicy was removed in commit > > > 62a077978b78d8ec49e6f797d418fff567ce4532. > > > > Yes, installing it can be avoided as, for me, the goal is to have > > it shipped with the flatpak bundle. Still, while promoting it as > > a testing tool, not sure what's the problem on shipping that. > > Why not focus on virt-viewer flatpak instead? I'm completely in favor in working on something like that but I would rather do it with gnome-boxes instead as I can add (nightly) qemu, spice-protocol, spice, spice-gtk to a single flatpak. Having a virt-viewer flatpak does not mean _not_ having a spicy.flatkpak (to me); one is full featured spice client while the other a testing tool... > > CC'ing teuf due his commit above, > > > > Thanks. Cheers, signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hi On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 9:55 AM Victor Toso wrote: > > Hi, > > On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 11:45:18AM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > > Hi > > > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 7:32 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > > > > > From: Victor Toso > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Trying to improve and integrate flatpak for spicy together with > > > gitlab-ci. I hope the changes here makes sense to you. > > > > Please do not distribute spicy. I wonder why it is still > > installed! > > > > We had several issues with end-users that we don't want to > > address in spicy, there are enough clients out there. > > It is a testing tool and we promote it as such. What's the > problem? > We don't want end-users to use it, so distributing it could lead to wrong assumptions. > > the desktop file for spicy was removed in commit > > 62a077978b78d8ec49e6f797d418fff567ce4532. > > Yes, installing it can be avoided as, for me, the goal is to have > it shipped with the flatpak bundle. Still, while promoting it as > a testing tool, not sure what's the problem on shipping that. Why not focus on virt-viewer flatpak instead? > > CC'ing teuf due his commit above, > > Thanks. > > > > You can see the end result at: > > > > > > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/victortoso/spice-gtk/pipelines/18268 > > > > > > Victor Toso (10): > > > flatpak: Use 'master' runtime > > > flatpak: update pyparsing 2.0.3 -> 2.2.0 > > > flatpak: update python-six from 1.10.0 -> 1.11.0 > > > flatpak: add .desktop for spicy > > > gitlab-ci: group and rename jobs > > > gitlab-ci: move windows dependencies to a variable > > > gitlab-ci: create before_script per job > > > gitlab-ci: add artifacts for logs and tests > > > gitlab-ci: add mingw meson build > > > gitlab-ci: add stages and manual flatpak generation > > > > > > .gitlab-ci.yml | 171 --- > > > data/meson.build | 20 > > > data/org.spicespace.spicy.desktop.in | 11 ++ > > > data/org.spicespace.spicy.json | 23 ++-- > > > 4 files changed, 169 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-) > > > create mode 100644 data/org.spicespace.spicy.desktop.in > > > > > > -- > > > 2.19.0 > > > > > > ___ > > > Spice-devel mailing list > > > Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel > > > > > > > > -- > > Marc-André Lureau -- Marc-André Lureau ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hi, On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 11:45:18AM +0100, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 7:32 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > > > From: Victor Toso > > > > Hi, > > > > Trying to improve and integrate flatpak for spicy together with > > gitlab-ci. I hope the changes here makes sense to you. > > Please do not distribute spicy. I wonder why it is still > installed! > > We had several issues with end-users that we don't want to > address in spicy, there are enough clients out there. It is a testing tool and we promote it as such. What's the problem? > the desktop file for spicy was removed in commit > 62a077978b78d8ec49e6f797d418fff567ce4532. Yes, installing it can be avoided as, for me, the goal is to have it shipped with the flatpak bundle. Still, while promoting it as a testing tool, not sure what's the problem on shipping that. CC'ing teuf due his commit above, Thanks. > > You can see the end result at: > > > > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/victortoso/spice-gtk/pipelines/18268 > > > > Victor Toso (10): > > flatpak: Use 'master' runtime > > flatpak: update pyparsing 2.0.3 -> 2.2.0 > > flatpak: update python-six from 1.10.0 -> 1.11.0 > > flatpak: add .desktop for spicy > > gitlab-ci: group and rename jobs > > gitlab-ci: move windows dependencies to a variable > > gitlab-ci: create before_script per job > > gitlab-ci: add artifacts for logs and tests > > gitlab-ci: add mingw meson build > > gitlab-ci: add stages and manual flatpak generation > > > > .gitlab-ci.yml | 171 --- > > data/meson.build | 20 > > data/org.spicespace.spicy.desktop.in | 11 ++ > > data/org.spicespace.spicy.json | 23 ++-- > > 4 files changed, 169 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-) > > create mode 100644 data/org.spicespace.spicy.desktop.in > > > > -- > > 2.19.0 > > > > ___ > > Spice-devel mailing list > > Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel > > > > -- > Marc-André Lureau signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
Re: [Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
Hi On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 7:32 PM Victor Toso wrote: > > From: Victor Toso > > Hi, > > Trying to improve and integrate flatpak for spicy together with > gitlab-ci. I hope the changes here makes sense to you. Please do not distribute spicy. I wonder why it is still installed! We had several issues with end-users that we don't want to address in spicy, there are enough clients out there. the desktop file for spicy was removed in commit 62a077978b78d8ec49e6f797d418fff567ce4532. > > You can see the end result at: > > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/victortoso/spice-gtk/pipelines/18268 > > Victor Toso (10): > flatpak: Use 'master' runtime > flatpak: update pyparsing 2.0.3 -> 2.2.0 > flatpak: update python-six from 1.10.0 -> 1.11.0 > flatpak: add .desktop for spicy > gitlab-ci: group and rename jobs > gitlab-ci: move windows dependencies to a variable > gitlab-ci: create before_script per job > gitlab-ci: add artifacts for logs and tests > gitlab-ci: add mingw meson build > gitlab-ci: add stages and manual flatpak generation > > .gitlab-ci.yml | 171 --- > data/meson.build | 20 > data/org.spicespace.spicy.desktop.in | 11 ++ > data/org.spicespace.spicy.json | 23 ++-- > 4 files changed, 169 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 data/org.spicespace.spicy.desktop.in > > -- > 2.19.0 > > ___ > Spice-devel mailing list > Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel -- Marc-André Lureau ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
[Spice-devel] [spice-gtk v1 00/10] Flatpak + CI
From: Victor Toso Hi, Trying to improve and integrate flatpak for spicy together with gitlab-ci. I hope the changes here makes sense to you. You can see the end result at: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/victortoso/spice-gtk/pipelines/18268 Victor Toso (10): flatpak: Use 'master' runtime flatpak: update pyparsing 2.0.3 -> 2.2.0 flatpak: update python-six from 1.10.0 -> 1.11.0 flatpak: add .desktop for spicy gitlab-ci: group and rename jobs gitlab-ci: move windows dependencies to a variable gitlab-ci: create before_script per job gitlab-ci: add artifacts for logs and tests gitlab-ci: add mingw meson build gitlab-ci: add stages and manual flatpak generation .gitlab-ci.yml | 171 --- data/meson.build | 20 data/org.spicespace.spicy.desktop.in | 11 ++ data/org.spicespace.spicy.json | 23 ++-- 4 files changed, 169 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-) create mode 100644 data/org.spicespace.spicy.desktop.in -- 2.19.0 ___ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
