4:31 p.m.
0.91 was the first time we had an experimental branch, but I'm not against
it again.
I would also like to hear from Jabier if he thinks something is a review
away from inclusion this cycle or if he thinks it's better to defer his
branches for 0.92.
Cheers,
Josh
On May 5, 2016 12:15 AM, "Alex Valavanis" <valavanisalex@...400...>
wrote:
OK, this all sounds very promising. Unfortunately, I won't be
available to join in the IRC meeting tomorrow, but by the sounds of
things, we're not awaiting any new urgent feature additions. Can I
suggest, therefore, that we move into Feature Freeze as soon as
possible, and concentrate on bug fixing ready for release? As in
previous cycles, we could start an experimental branch for features
that can wait until after 0.92.
AV
On 5 May 2016 at 07:59, Josh Andler <scislac@...400...> wrote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've worked with SUV for the past half dozen years or so on
figuring out
release blocker stuff. I'm willing to take it on even if there is no
interest on SUV's end to help determine such things. I will draft a
release
plan tomorrow morning (as I had previously offered to) and send it to
you
Bryce for your review and edits and I will begin reviewing for blocker
bugs
in the tracker after that.
Cheers,
Josh
On May 4, 2016 9:08 PM, "Bryce Harrington" <bryce@...961...>
wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 03:57:51PM +0200, Tavmjong Bah wrote:
> > On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 09:04 -0400, Martin Owens wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 14:27 +0200, Tavmjong Bah wrote:
> > > >
> > > > We should discuss this on Friday's IRC meeting.
> > > Friday's meeting is a board meeting isn't it? I thought developer
> > > decisions like releases were more developer consensus on mailing list
> > > type things and less board responsibility.
> > >
> > > (or is this just convenient discussion space?)
> >
> > Yes, it is not the board's duty to make developer decisions. But I
> > think the board does have the responsibility to aid (and prod) the
> > developers to make decisions when needed as well as to support the
> > execution of those decisions (e.g. fund a dedicated hackfest).
> >
> > (it is also a convenient discussion space)
>
> You're both right, and I do agree that having a meeting to get things
> going with the release is a great idea.
>
> Traditionally we've often encouraged non-board-specific technical
> discussions to happen immediately following the board meeting. What if
> we had a short board meeting for say 20-30 min, and then a second
> followup meeting specifically to focus on release coordination
> discussions?
>
> Sounds like we've crested the hill on the cmake work (we still need to
> do a comparison between the automake-generated dist and the cmake dist,
> to see if we're missing anything important). Once we're comfortable
> with what's in the dist, I can cut an alpha release - possibly as early
> as this weekend. I'm prepared to do a series of (bi-weekly?)
> pre-releases as we work towards the final release. Next step would be
> to start gathering a list of release blockers and recruit owners for
> getting those items examined; I would love it if someone could volunteer
> to coordinate/manage the release blocker bugfixing work.
>
> Bryce
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find and fix application performance
issues faster with Applications
> Manager
Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple
> tiers of
> your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly and
> reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial!
> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
> _______________________________________________
> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Find and fix application performance issues faster with Applications
Manager
Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple
tiers
of
your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly and
reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
6:54 p.m.
New subject: 0.92 release
Just one thing for clarification:
0.91.x is cancelled then, right?
Just so we can stop wasting effort on an inactive branch...
Regards,
Eduard
Am 5. Mai 2016 9:32:47 vorm. schrieb Josh Andler <scislac@...400...>:
0.91 was the first time we had an experimental branch, but I'm
not against
it again.
I would also like to hear from Jabier if he thinks something is a review
away from inclusion this cycle or if he thinks it's better to defer his
branches for 0.92.
Cheers,
Josh
On May 5, 2016 12:15 AM, "Alex Valavanis" <valavanisalex@...400...>
wrote:
OK, this all sounds very promising. Unfortunately, I won't be
available to join in the IRC meeting tomorrow, but by the sounds of
things, we're not awaiting any new urgent feature additions. Can I
suggest, therefore, that we move into Feature Freeze as soon as
possible, and concentrate on bug fixing ready for release? As in
previous cycles, we could start an experimental branch for features
that can wait until after 0.92.
AV
On 5 May 2016 at 07:59, Josh Andler <scislac@...400...> wrote:
> I've worked with SUV for the past half dozen years or so on figuring out
> release blocker stuff. I'm willing to take it on even if there is no
> interest on SUV's end to help determine such things. I will draft a
release
> plan tomorrow morning (as I had previously offered to) and send it to you
> Bryce for your review and edits and I will begin reviewing for blocker
bugs
> in the tracker after that.
>
> Cheers,
> Josh
>
> On May 4, 2016 9:08 PM, "Bryce Harrington" <bryce@...961...>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 03:57:51PM +0200, Tavmjong Bah wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 09:04 -0400, Martin Owens wrote:
>> > > On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 14:27 +0200, Tavmjong Bah wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > We should discuss this on Friday's IRC meeting.
>> > > Friday's meeting is a board meeting isn't it? I thought
developer
>> > > decisions like releases were more developer consensus on mailing list
>> > > type things and less board responsibility.
>> > >
>> > > (or is this just convenient discussion space?)
>> >
>> > Yes, it is not the board's duty to make developer decisions. But I
>> > think the board does have the responsibility to aid (and prod) the
>> > developers to make decisions when needed as well as to support the
>> > execution of those decisions (e.g. fund a dedicated hackfest).
>> >
>> > (it is also a convenient discussion space)
>>
>> You're both right, and I do agree that having a meeting to get things
>> going with the release is a great idea.
>>
>> Traditionally we've often encouraged non-board-specific technical
>> discussions to happen immediately following the board meeting. What if
>> we had a short board meeting for say 20-30 min, and then a second
>> followup meeting specifically to focus on release coordination
>> discussions?
>>
>> Sounds like we've crested the hill on the cmake work (we still need to
>> do a comparison between the automake-generated dist and the cmake dist,
>> to see if we're missing anything important). Once we're comfortable
>> with what's in the dist, I can cut an alpha release - possibly as early
>> as this weekend. I'm prepared to do a series of (bi-weekly?)
>> pre-releases as we work towards the final release. Next step would be
>> to start gathering a list of release blockers and recruit owners for
>> getting those items examined; I would love it if someone could volunteer
>> to coordinate/manage the release blocker bugfixing work.
>>
>> Bryce
>>
>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Find and fix application performance issues faster with Applications
>> Manager
>> Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple
>> tiers of
>> your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly and
>> reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial!
>> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
>> _______________________________________________
>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>> Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Find and fix application performance issues faster with Applications
Manager
> Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple
tiers
> of
> your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly and
> reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial!
> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
> _______________________________________________
> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>
----------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find and fix application performance issues faster with Applications Manager
Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple tiers of
your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly and
reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
----------
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
12:23 a.m.
New subject: 0.92 release
Eduard,
No, it will likely be expedited... But I'm not personally going to look for
more backports ATM. 0.92 being released will not be a super fast process
even if jumped on right away... blockers usually aren't fixed quickly since
they're not generally trivial. I would focus your efforts on trunk at this
point though.
Cheers,
Josh
On May 5, 2016 2:54 AM, "Eduard Braun" <eduard.braun2@...173...> wrote:
Just one thing for clarification:
0.91.x is cancelled then, right?
Just so we can stop wasting effort on an inactive branch...
Regards,
Eduard
Am 5. Mai 2016 9:32:47 vorm. schrieb Josh Andler <scislac@...400...>:
> 0.91 was the first time we had an experimental branch, but I'm not
> against it again.
>
> I would also like to hear from Jabier if he thinks something is a review
> away from inclusion this cycle or if he thinks it's better to defer his
> branches for 0.92.
>
> Cheers,
> Josh
> On May 5, 2016 12:15 AM, "Alex Valavanis" <valavanisalex@...400...>
> wrote:
>
> OK, this all sounds very promising. Unfortunately, I won't be
> available to join in the IRC meeting tomorrow, but by the sounds of
> things, we're not awaiting any new urgent feature additions. Can I
> suggest, therefore, that we move into Feature Freeze as soon as
> possible, and concentrate on bug fixing ready for release? As in
> previous cycles, we could start an experimental branch for features
> that can wait until after 0.92.
>
> AV
>
> On 5 May 2016 at 07:59, Josh Andler <scislac@...400...> wrote:
> > I've worked with SUV for the past half dozen years or so on figuring out
> > release blocker stuff. I'm willing to take it on even if there is no
> > interest on SUV's end to help determine such things. I will draft a
> release
> > plan tomorrow morning (as I had previously offered to) and send it to
> you
> > Bryce for your review and edits and I will begin reviewing for blocker
> bugs
> > in the tracker after that.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Josh
> >
> > On May 4, 2016 9:08 PM, "Bryce Harrington" <bryce@...961...>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 03:57:51PM +0200, Tavmjong Bah wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 09:04 -0400, Martin Owens wrote:
> >> > > On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 14:27 +0200, Tavmjong Bah wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > We should discuss this on Friday's IRC meeting.
> >> > > Friday's meeting is a board meeting isn't it? I thought
developer
> >> > > decisions like releases were more developer consensus on mailing
> list
> >> > > type things and less board responsibility.
> >> > >
> >> > > (or is this just convenient discussion space?)
> >> >
> >> > Yes, it is not the board's duty to make developer decisions. But I
> >> > think the board does have the responsibility to aid (and prod) the
> >> > developers to make decisions when needed as well as to support the
> >> > execution of those decisions (e.g. fund a dedicated hackfest).
> >> >
> >> > (it is also a convenient discussion space)
> >>
> >> You're both right, and I do agree that having a meeting to get things
> >> going with the release is a great idea.
> >>
> >> Traditionally we've often encouraged non-board-specific technical
> >> discussions to happen immediately following the board meeting. What if
> >> we had a short board meeting for say 20-30 min, and then a second
> >> followup meeting specifically to focus on release coordination
> >> discussions?
> >>
> >> Sounds like we've crested the hill on the cmake work (we still need to
> >> do a comparison between the automake-generated dist and the cmake dist,
> >> to see if we're missing anything important). Once we're
comfortable
> >> with what's in the dist, I can cut an alpha release - possibly as early
> >> as this weekend. I'm prepared to do a series of (bi-weekly?)
> >> pre-releases as we work towards the final release. Next step would be
> >> to start gathering a list of release blockers and recruit owners for
> >> getting those items examined; I would love it if someone could
> volunteer
> >> to coordinate/manage the release blocker bugfixing work.
> >>
> >> Bryce
> >>
> >>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Find and fix application performance issues faster with Applications
> >> Manager
> >> Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple
> >> tiers of
> >> your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly
> and
> >> reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial!
> >> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> >> Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Find and fix application performance issues faster with Applications
> Manager
> > Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple
> tiers
> > of
> > your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly and
> > reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial!
> > https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
> > _______________________________________________
> > Inkscape-devel mailing list
> > Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
> >
>
> ------------------------------
> Find and fix application performance issues faster with Applications
> Manager
> Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple
> tiers of
> your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly and
> reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial!
> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
> _______________________________________________
> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>
>
11:31 p.m.
New subject: 0.92 release
Hi to all. Thank Josh for think about me.
The status of my merge review branches is:
* Pointwise branch, have reviewer, tweenk, substitute of
fillet/chamfer. this is very important to be merged as soon as posible
because is not compatible with old code -never released-
https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/inkscape/pointwise
* Mirror symmetry, have reviewer, tweenk, its practycaly full reviewed.
a one step to 0.92
https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/inkscape/mirror-symetry-lpe-impr...
* Branch clip eraser:
https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/inkscape/clip_eraser
Not ended yet but no complex branch, I hope I could get ended at the
end of next week.
Basicaly is a doctormon idea to add an optional mode to eraser tool to
use clip mask and allow erase in all kind of objects.
* Mesh and knot improvements, related to mesh gradients, Not enoght
tested and not sure about it yes, better wait to 0.93
https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/inkscape/mesh_and_knot_improvements
* Offset, better work than current offset LPE but some crash with
asserts in new boolops, maybe is better wait to 0.93
https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/inkscape/offset
FearestPoint (2geom) not used jet, can wait to 0.93.
Also there is some patches to merge, the most important to me is the
one to convert a item to paths retaining fills, markers and paint order.
I´m outside form my computer till friday night or saturaday so I
couldent put the 2 last links jet, maybe tonight can have some time but
not sure.
Cheers, Jabier.
El 2016-05-05 9:31, Josh Andler escribió:
0.91 was the first time we had an experimental branch, but I'm
not
against it again.
I would also like to hear from Jabier if he thinks something is a
review away from inclusion this cycle or if he thinks it's better to
defer his branches for 0.92.
Cheers,
Josh
On May 5, 2016 12:15 AM, "Alex Valavanis" <valavanisalex@...400...
[9]> wrote:
> OK, this all sounds very promising. Unfortunately, I won't be
> available to join in the IRC meeting tomorrow, but by the sounds of
> things, we're not awaiting any new urgent feature additions. Can
> I
> suggest, therefore, that we move into Feature Freeze as soon as
> possible, and concentrate on bug fixing ready for release? As in
> previous cycles, we could start an experimental branch for features
> that can wait until after 0.92.
>
> AV
>
> On 5 May 2016 at 07:59, Josh Andler <scislac@...400... [1]> wrote:
> > I've worked with SUV for the past half dozen years or so on
> figuring out
> > release blocker stuff. I'm willing to take it on even if there is
> no
> > interest on SUV's end to help determine such things. I will draft
> a release
> > plan tomorrow morning (as I had previously offered to) and send
> it to you
> > Bryce for your review and edits and I will begin reviewing for
> blocker bugs
> > in the tracker after that.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Josh
> >
> > On May 4, 2016 9:08 PM, "Bryce Harrington"
> <bryce@...961... [2]>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 03:57:51PM +0200, Tavmjong Bah wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 09:04 -0400, Martin Owens wrote:
> >> > > On Wed, 2016-05-04 at 14:27 +0200, Tavmjong Bah wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > We should discuss this on Friday's IRC meeting.
> >> > > Friday's meeting is a board meeting isn't it? I thought
> developer
> >> > > decisions like releases were more developer consensus on
> mailing list
> >> > > type things and less board responsibility.
> >> > >
> >> > > (or is this just convenient discussion space?)
> >> >
> >> > Yes, it is not the board's duty to make developer decisions.
> But I
> >> > think the board does have the responsibility to aid (and prod)
> the
> >> > developers to make decisions when needed as well as to support
> the
> >> > execution of those decisions (e.g. fund a dedicated hackfest).
> >> >
> >> > (it is also a convenient discussion space)
> >>
> >> You're both right, and I do agree that having a meeting to get
> things
> >> going with the release is a great idea.
> >>
> >> Traditionally we've often encouraged non-board-specific
> technical
> >> discussions to happen immediately following the board meeting.
> What if
> >> we had a short board meeting for say 20-30 min, and then a
> second
> >> followup meeting specifically to focus on release coordination
> >> discussions?
> >>
> >> Sounds like we've crested the hill on the cmake work (we still
> need to
> >> do a comparison between the automake-generated dist and the
> cmake dist,
> >> to see if we're missing anything important). Once we're
> comfortable
> >> with what's in the dist, I can cut an alpha release - possibly
> as early
> >> as this weekend. I'm prepared to do a series of (bi-weekly?)
> >> pre-releases as we work towards the final release. Next step
> would be
> >> to start gathering a list of release blockers and recruit owners
> for
> >> getting those items examined; I would love it if someone could
> volunteer
> >> to coordinate/manage the release blocker bugfixing work.
> >>
> >> Bryce
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Find and fix application performance issues faster with
> Applications
> >> Manager
> >> Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into
> multiple
> >> tiers of
> >> your business applications. It resolves application problems
> quickly and
> >> reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial!
> >> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z [3]
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> >> Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net [4]
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel [5]
> >
> >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Find and fix application performance issues faster with
> Applications Manager
> > Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into
> multiple tiers
> > of
> > your business applications. It resolves application problems
> quickly and
> > reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial!
> > https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z [6]
> > _______________________________________________
> > Inkscape-devel mailing list
> > Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net [7]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel [8]
> >
Links:
------
[1] mailto:scislac@...400...
[2] mailto:bryce@...961...
[3] https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
[4] mailto:Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
[5] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
[6] https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
[7] mailto:Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
[8] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
[9] mailto:valavanisalex@...400...
1:22 a.m.
New subject: 0.92 release
On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 16:31 +0200, Jabier Arraiza wrote:
* Branch clip eraser:
https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/inkscape/clip_eraser
Not ended yet but no complex branch, I hope I could get ended at the
end of next week.
Basicaly is a doctormon idea to add an optional mode to eraser tool
to use clip mask and allow erase in all kind of objects.
Is this ready to review now? I'm very excited by the feature and feel
that by 0.93 it could be the default eraser mode.
Martin,
1:56 a.m.
New subject: 0.92 release
El 2016-05-05 18:22, Martin Owens escribió:
On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 16:31 +0200, Jabier Arraiza wrote:
> * Branch clip eraser:
> https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/inkscape/clip_eraser
> Not ended yet but no complex branch, I hope I could get ended at
> the
> end of next week.
> Basicaly is a doctormon idea to add an optional mode to eraser tool
> to use clip mask and allow erase in all kind of objects.
Is this ready to review now? I'm very excited by the feature and feel
that by 0.93 it could be the default eraser mode.
Martin,
Not jet but is very advanced, maybe I can finish this weekend. Ping you
to review.
About the default mode, the mode value store the last mode used in a
prefs config var so if the user dont change the mode...
I ping you when done for review!
Cheers, Jabier.
3:10 a.m.
New subject: 0.92 release
Whatever happened with the Swatch Dialog GSoC project? Did it get merged
and I don't remember? Is it too broken/bitrotted to merge at this point?
Cheers,
Josh
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Jabier Arraiza <jabier.arraiza@...2893...>
wrote:
El 2016-05-05 18:22, Martin Owens escribió:
> On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 16:31 +0200, Jabier Arraiza wrote:
>> * Branch clip eraser:
>> https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscape.dev/inkscape/clip_eraser
>> Not ended yet but no complex branch, I hope I could get ended at
>> the
>> end of next week.
>> Basicaly is a doctormon idea to add an optional mode to eraser tool
>> to use clip mask and allow erase in all kind of objects.
>
> Is this ready to review now? I'm very excited by the feature and feel
> that by 0.93 it could be the default eraser mode.
>
> Martin,
Not jet but is very advanced, maybe I can finish this weekend. Ping you
to review.
About the default mode, the mode value store the last mode used in a
prefs config var so if the user dont change the mode...
I ping you when done for review!
Cheers, Jabier.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find and fix application performance issues faster with Applications
Manager
Applications Manager provides deep performance insights into multiple
tiers of
your business applications. It resolves application problems quickly and
reduces your MTTR. Get your free trial!
https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/302982198;130105516;z
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
Inkscape-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
4:03 a.m.
New subject: 0.92 release
On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 11:10 -0700, Josh Andler wrote:
Whatever happened with the Swatch Dialog GSoC project? Did it get
merged and I don't remember? Is it too broken/bitrotted to merge at
this point?
Parts of it got merged (rendering of hatches + some other bits). The
Swatch Dialog part did not get merged. I pestered Tomasz a bunch of
times but he never got the last part merged. I mentioned this to
Krzysztof at the Leed's hackfest and Krzysztof said he would have a
look. (He also is in contact with Tomasz.)
Tav
Cheers,
Josh
5:58 p.m.
New subject: 0.92 release
2016-05-05 12:03 GMT-07:00 Tavmjong Bah <tavmjong@...8...>:
On Thu, 2016-05-05 at 11:10 -0700, Josh Andler wrote:
> Whatever happened with the Swatch Dialog GSoC project? Did it get
> merged and I don't remember? Is it too broken/bitrotted to merge at
> this point?
Parts of it got merged (rendering of hatches + some other bits). The
Swatch Dialog part did not get merged. I pestered Tomasz a bunch of
times but he never got the last part merged. I mentioned this to
Krzysztof at the Leed's hackfest and Krzysztof said he would have a
look. (He also is in contact with Tomasz.)
Not exactly in contact, I only know that he works for Google now.
I want to focus on the GTK3 effort for now, so I don't know how long
it will be until I can look at this code.
2515
days inactive
2518
days old
inkscape-devel@lists.inkscape.org
8 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Eduard Braun -
Jabier Arraiza -
Josh Andler -
Krzysztof Kosiński -
Martin Owens -
Tavmjong Bah