7:59 p.m.
Hi. I'm the packager of gnome-shell-extension-weather.
Currently I'm packaging the fork by Neroth (
https://github.com/Neroth/gnome-shell-extension-weather ), which is
compatible with Gnome versions up to 3.4 (i.e. Fedora up to 17), into the
branches F-16, F-17, F-18 and devel.
Now, with the release of Fedora 18 approaching, I'd like to switch to the
fork by canek-pelaez (
https://github.com/canek-pelaez/gnome-shell-extension-weather ), that is
compatible only with Gnome 3.6, i.e Fedora 18.
The more obvious choice is packaging the latter into the F-18 and devel
branches only and simply leaving the F-16 and F-17 branches unchanged.
Is this the right approach? If not, how should I behave?
I'd like to hear some opinions from more experienced users. Thank you.
Cheers,
Mattia M.
8:23 p.m.
On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:59 PM, M.M. <hal8600(a)hotmail.it> wrote:
branches only and simply leaving the F-16 and F-17 branches
unchanged.
Is this the right approach? If not, how should I behave?
Has Neroth given up development on his version forever? If so, it
sounds sensible to me to switch in RPM Fusion.
- Ken
6:05 a.m.
Thanks, but my question is: is it enough to just package the new fork into
the F-18 and devel branches and leave the previous ones unchanged and
out-of date?
2012/10/20 Ken Dreyer <ktdreyer(a)ktdreyer.com>
On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:59 PM, M.M. <hal8600(a)hotmail.it>
wrote:
> branches only and simply leaving the F-16 and F-17 branches unchanged.
> Is this the right approach? If not, how should I behave?
Has Neroth given up development on his version forever? If so, it
sounds sensible to me to switch in RPM Fusion.
- Ken
6:33 a.m.
Can anyone clarify my doubt, please?
In other words, the main point is: can different branches of the same
package host different forks of a software?
Thanks.
2012/10/21 M.M. <hal8600(a)hotmail.it>
Thanks, but my question is: is it enough to just package the new fork
into
the F-18 and devel branches and leave the previous ones unchanged and
out-of date?
2012/10/20 Ken Dreyer <ktdreyer(a)ktdreyer.com>
> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:59 PM, M.M. <hal8600(a)hotmail.it> wrote:
> > branches only and simply leaving the F-16 and F-17 branches unchanged.
> > Is this the right approach? If not, how should I behave?
>
> Has Neroth given up development on his version forever? If so, it
> sounds sensible to me to switch in RPM Fusion.
>
> - Ken
>
>
6:54 a.m.
Hi Mattia,
You can only package the new fork in F-18 and later.
But it will lead to a problem if you cannot maintain this fork for the
whole F-18 lifetime.
But F-16 and F-17 are still supposed to be maintained, and if the
software doesn't work well, it is expected that it is fix.
I can also be a previous fork on the software.
Thx
Nicolas (kwizart)
2012/10/21 M.M. <hal8600(a)hotmail.it>:
Thanks, but my question is: is it enough to just package the new fork
into
the F-18 and devel branches and leave the previous ones unchanged and out-of
date?
2012/10/20 Ken Dreyer <ktdreyer(a)ktdreyer.com>
>
> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:59 PM, M.M. <hal8600(a)hotmail.it> wrote:
> > branches only and simply leaving the F-16 and F-17 branches unchanged.
> > Is this the right approach? If not, how should I behave?
>
> Has Neroth given up development on his version forever? If so, it
> sounds sensible to me to switch in RPM Fusion.
>
> - Ken
>
7:02 a.m.
Yes, my idea is to package the new fork (
https://github.com/canek-pelaez/gnome-shell-extension-weather , compatible
only with Gnome 3.6) into the "F-18" and "devel" branches and keep the
old
one ( https://github.com/Neroth/gnome-shell-extension-weather , compatible
with Gnome up to 3.4) into the "F-16" and "F-17".
By the way, which problems are you talking about?
2012/10/23 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com>
Hi Mattia,
You can only package the new fork in F-18 and later.
But it will lead to a problem if you cannot maintain this fork for the
whole F-18 lifetime.
But F-16 and F-17 are still supposed to be maintained, and if the
software doesn't work well, it is expected that it is fix.
I can also be a previous fork on the software.
Thx
Nicolas (kwizart)
2012/10/21 M.M. <hal8600(a)hotmail.it>:
> Thanks, but my question is: is it enough to just package the new fork
into
> the F-18 and devel branches and leave the previous ones unchanged and
out-of
> date?
>
> 2012/10/20 Ken Dreyer <ktdreyer(a)ktdreyer.com>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:59 PM, M.M. <hal8600(a)hotmail.it> wrote:
>> > branches only and simply leaving the F-16 and F-17 branches unchanged.
>> > Is this the right approach? If not, how should I behave?
>>
>> Has Neroth given up development on his version forever? If so, it
>> sounds sensible to me to switch in RPM Fusion.
>>
>> - Ken
>>
>
3:44 a.m.
M. M. wrote:
Yes, my idea is to package the new fork (
https://github.com/canek-pelaez/gnome-shell-extension-weather , compatible
only with Gnome 3.6) into the "F-18" and "devel" branches and keep
the old
one ( https://github.com/Neroth/gnome-shell-extension-weather , compatible
with Gnome up to 3.4) into the "F-16" and "F-17".
By the way, which problems are you talking about?
If there are no bugs with the version in F16 and F17, you don't have to do
anything. GNOME doesn't get upgraded to a different branch in stable
releases (only to bugfix releases), so there shouldn't be any need to touch
the shell extension at all, unless you need to fix a bug in the shell
extension itself.
Kevin Kofler
4198
days inactive
4205
days old
rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
7 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Ken Dreyer -
Kevin Kofler -
M.M. -
Nicolas Chauvet