I have the latest debian package, but dunno what that is... can't you put something in the about dialog, so that I know... I never remember this terminal stuff. Anyways, I get a crash when I try to copy a text with a gradient fill. That is strange on the one hand and annoying on the other. I hope it's an easy to fix or fixed already.
David
Anyways, I get a crash when I try to copy a text with a gradient fill. That is strange on the one hand and annoying on the other. I hope it's an easy to fix or fixed already.
It was in 0.39. Fixed now. Though now, insteadm we have display problems with gradient on text.
The About dialog shows the version btw.
On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 05:16:02PM -0300, bulia byak wrote:
Anyways, I get a crash when I try to copy a text with a gradient fill.
It was in 0.39. Fixed now.
Has that fix been copied to the 0.39 branch? Should it be?
More generally, how important is it to backport things to stable release branch at the cost of spending time on HEAD ?
I don't see this fix mentioned in the changelog. (Bulia's 2004-06-02 looks relevant, but configure.in's CVS log suggests 0.39 was released in July.)
pjrm.
It was in 0.39. Fixed now.
Has that fix been copied to the 0.39 branch? Should it be?
Do we really have it as a branch? I think we don't yet have any "stable branch" worth backporting to. We're moving ahead too fast :)
I don't see this fix mentioned in the changelog. (Bulia's 2004-06-02 looks relevant, but configure.in's CVS log suggests 0.39 was released in July.)
see selection-chemistry.cpp revision 1.85; later it was refixed more correctly though
On Tue, 2004-10-12 at 22:05, bulia byak wrote:
It was in 0.39. Fixed now.
Has that fix been copied to the 0.39 branch? Should it be?
Do we really have it as a branch? I think we don't yet have any "stable branch" worth backporting to. We're moving ahead too fast :)
Yes, creating a branch is part of our release process; in this case the branch name is RELEASE_0_39_BRANCH.
I don't see this fix mentioned in the changelog. (Bulia's 2004-06-02 looks relevant, but configure.in's CVS log suggests 0.39 was released in July.)
see selection-chemistry.cpp revision 1.85; later it was refixed more correctly though
If someone would like to backport some fixes and things for a potential 0.39.1 release, they'd basically just need to check out the RELEASE_0_39_BRANCH, then commit the fixes normally on that branch.
Commits from that working copy will follow the "front" of that branch just as they do the HEAD branch.
Once we'd agreed an interim release was ready, it's just a matter of doing the release process again -- update files with the right version, and tag the revisions as RELEASE_0_39_1 (that's just a plain tag; we shouldn't re-create the _BRANCH).
-mental
If someone would like to backport some fixes and things for a potential 0.39.1 release, they'd basically just need to check out the RELEASE_0_39_BRANCH, then commit the fixes normally on that branch.
I don't think this will work. Many fixes (and doubtless many new bugs) are due to major reworking of the internals and are not separatable. Not to mention that there weren't a lot of fixes since 0.39; if we have some energy for bugfixes I'd much prefer it being spent on 0.40.
On Tue, 2004-10-12 at 20:38, bulia byak wrote:
If someone would like to backport some fixes and things for a potential 0.39.1 release, they'd basically just need to check out the RELEASE_0_39_BRANCH, then commit the fixes normally on that branch.
I don't think this will work. Many fixes (and doubtless many new bugs) are due to major reworking of the internals and are not separatable. Not to mention that there weren't a lot of fixes since 0.39; if we have some energy for bugfixes I'd much prefer it being spent on 0.40.
I agree with Bulia on this. I think that it is much better to work ahead. But, what I am curious about is whether this will become the interface between open source and the commercial world. That is kinda what is happening with the Linux kernel, Linus is maintaining the development push ahead version -- and then letting the distros pull those patches into whatever version they like. If people were using Inkscape in a commercial environment, I could see some of them willing to pay to get all the fixes in a stable branch. I'm sure other projects are the same. It'll be interesting if someone will make a desktop distro with extended updates and support for all the applications, or if this will fall on smaller, more specific companies.
--Ted
participants (5)
-
bulia byak -
David Christian Berg -
MenTaLguY -
Peter Moulder -
Ted Gould