Arch Linux

Dinth

Member

From: London

Registered: 2009-03-02

Posts: 238

GNOME 2.31 should been in gnome-unstable

Gnome 2.31 should hit gnome-unstable for long time. There are pretty much stable by the now, and also *many* bzr aur packages depends on 2.31 libraries. Please compile 2.31 for Arch. I could help with it, but its too much work for only one person. Im desperate for it, because i cannot continue my Ayatana backporting efforts without it.

Last edited by Dinth (2010-08-28 08:47:18)

graysky

Wiki Maintainer

From: :wq

Registered: 2008-12-01

Posts: 10,729

Website

Re: GNOME 2.31 should been in gnome-unstable

Probably best to do a feature request in the bugtracker rather than a post in the forums...

---

AUR packages • Zsh and other configs

wonder

Developer

From: Bucharest, Romania

Registered: 2006-07-05

Posts: 5,941

Website

Re: GNOME 2.31 should been in gnome-unstable

who sais that should be in there? that repo would be populated when is ready. now gnome team is releasing beta 2 and we always said that we are starting packing latest beta or first rc

Last edited by wonder (2010-08-28 09:42:42)

---

Give what you have. To someone, it may be better than you dare to think.

Dinth

Member

From: London

Registered: 2009-03-02

Posts: 238

Re: GNOME 2.31 should been in gnome-unstable

wonder: exacly, but that isnt good. Gnome development is different of KDE development, where this type of maintaing repo is very good. In Gnome, 2.31.x versions arent some thing as 2.32 alphas, but are pretty much stable and usable versions which add new features to enviroment.
For example, Wine or Battle Of Wesnoth have exacly same development models as GNOME, and there are odd versions of them in stable repositories.

Also many peoples use 2.31.x in other distributions already, and there is *many* software which already depends on 2.31.x - Arch Linux users cannot use them now.

I also mentioned this topic in my blog: http://dinthsblog.blogspot.com/2010/08/ … oject.html

Last edited by Dinth (2010-08-28 10:51:48)

wonder

Developer

From: Bucharest, Romania

Registered: 2006-07-05

Posts: 5,941

Website

Re: GNOME 2.31 should been in gnome-unstable

the point of starting the packaging so late is to do less work and wait until things are stabilize the dependencies.

for example 2.31.4 had a target for all modules gtk3 but now this was dropped and all maintainers needed to backport gtk2 support. if we started early that would mean  more work for every release.

waiting to last beta/first rc we ensure that we do dependencies review and adding new packaging once and for the final release only bump versions.

---

Give what you have. To someone, it may be better than you dare to think.

combuster

Member

From: Serbia

Registered: 2008-09-30

Posts: 711

Website

Re: GNOME 2.31 should been in gnome-unstable

I "wonder" if they make it upstream with 2.32 in time at all 

litemotiv

Forum Fellow

Registered: 2008-08-01

Posts: 5,026

Re: GNOME 2.31 should been in gnome-unstable

Dinth, the forums are not the place to discuss package release scheduling, please use the mailinglists if you want to contribute to the testing and acceptance process.

Closing.

---

ᶘ ᵒᴥᵒᶅ