[pacman-dev] Pacman 3.3 release imminent
OK, here we go. We have two basic lists to chop through. One is here: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacman_Roadmap#3.3_Final_Release_Plans. Of course, Xavier blew my (short) list away and tried to sneak in a much longer list. Sorry, but this is not all getting in if we are releasing before the end of the month. :) So the roadmap: http://bugs.archlinux.org/roadmap/proj3 Things *not* getting in 3.3.0: * FS#12950, -D operation (way too big of a change late in the game) * FS#14208, --print operation (once again, not as big as -D, but lets hold off on massive new option addition) Left on this list, some of which got in (or are getting in) tonight: * pkgbase inclusion in makepkg/repo-add (in tonight) * FS#13877, -k/--check patch (in tonight) * FS#12538, fetch callback (http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2009-April/008533.html) (if not in tonight, getting in very very soon) * FS#12775, -Suu operation, (in tonight) * FS#12772, makepkg default integrity check. I'm fine with changing it in the pacman source code, the Arch decision can be postponed, but thoughts? * FS#15210, makepkg and pkgdesc troubles. Our only real blocker bug at the moment, so this needs some sort of addressing before release. * NEWS updates, any more feedback/help on this is welcome A call for translation updates will come in 2 or 3 days time when we have all messages finalized. You are welcome to start before then, but please do not submit anything until all strings are final. -Dan
Dan McGee wrote:
* FS#12772, makepkg default integrity check. I'm fine with changing it in the pacman source code, the Arch decision can be postponed, but thoughts?
I am fine with leaving as it is in the pacman source makepkg.conf. Any distro using pacman should ship thier own custom makepkg.conf and pacman.conf and the default is safe enough and fast.
* FS#15210, makepkg and pkgdesc troubles. Our only real blocker bug at the moment, so this needs some sort of addressing before release.
I know the cause, and reverting that patch will fix it... but I am not sure if that is the best way forward yet. Allan
OK, here we go.
We have two basic lists to chop through. One is here: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacman_Roadmap#3.3_Final_Release_Plans. Of course, Xavier blew my (short) list away and tried to sneak in a much longer list. Sorry, but this is not all getting in if we are releasing before the end of the month. :)
So the roadmap: http://bugs.archlinux.org/roadmap/proj3
Things *not* getting in 3.3.0: * FS#12950, -D operation (way too big of a change late in the game)
OK. I will modify the "API changes" patch accordingly, I will correct libalpm documentation in README in the same patch.
* FS#14208, --print operation (once again, not as big as -D, but lets hold off on massive new option addition)
Left on this list, some of which got in (or are getting in) tonight: * pkgbase inclusion in makepkg/repo-add (in tonight) * FS#13877, -k/--check patch (in tonight) * FS#12538, fetch callback (http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2009-April/008533.html) (if not in tonight, getting in very very soon) * FS#12775, -Suu operation, (in tonight) * FS#12772, makepkg default integrity check. I'm fine with changing it in the pacman source code, the Arch decision can be postponed, but thoughts? * FS#15210, makepkg and pkgdesc troubles. Our only real blocker bug at the moment, so this needs some sort of addressing before release. * NEWS updates, any more feedback/help on this is welcome
I have one TODO left: http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2009-April/008567.html Iirc, the only real issue is the crappy output (see Xav's example), I will start to work on this. Unfortunately I have very little freetime today and tomorrow (tomorrow it is 0 sec), and my ArchLinux HDD has ~just died, so I cannot test anything rigorously. I am also going to change the default remove_unresolvable answer to no, because now -S --noconfirm gets no error even if not all packages were installed, which is odd imho. Bye ------------------------------------------------------ SZTE Egyetemi Konyvtar - http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu This message was sent using IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
Idézet Nagy Gabor <ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu>:
OK, here we go.
We have two basic lists to chop through. One is here: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacman_Roadmap#3.3_Final_Release_Plans. Of course, Xavier blew my (short) list away and tried to sneak in a much longer list. Sorry, but this is not all getting in if we are releasing before the end of the month. :)
So the roadmap: http://bugs.archlinux.org/roadmap/proj3
Things *not* getting in 3.3.0: * FS#12950, -D operation (way too big of a change late in the game)
OK. I will modify the "API changes" patch accordingly, I will correct libalpm documentation in README in the same patch.
* FS#14208, --print operation (once again, not as big as -D, but lets hold off on massive new option addition)
Left on this list, some of which got in (or are getting in) tonight: * pkgbase inclusion in makepkg/repo-add (in tonight) * FS#13877, -k/--check patch (in tonight) * FS#12538, fetch callback (http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2009-April/008533.html) (if not in tonight, getting in very very soon) * FS#12775, -Suu operation, (in tonight) * FS#12772, makepkg default integrity check. I'm fine with changing it in the pacman source code, the Arch decision can be postponed, but thoughts? * FS#15210, makepkg and pkgdesc troubles. Our only real blocker bug at the moment, so this needs some sort of addressing before release. * NEWS updates, any more feedback/help on this is welcome
I have one TODO left: http://www.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/2009-April/008567.html
Iirc, the only real issue is the crappy output (see Xav's example), I will start to work on this. Unfortunately I have very little freetime today and tomorrow (tomorrow it is 0 sec), and my ArchLinux HDD has ~just died, so I cannot test anything rigorously. I am also going to change the default remove_unresolvable answer to no, because now -S --noconfirm gets no error even if not all packages were installed, which is odd imho.
Bye
All the work mentioned here can be found in my working branch (I cannot send inline patches with horde): http://repo.or.cz/w/pacman-ng.git?a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/working My TODO has not been fixed yet, but we discussed it on irc with Xavier: it is just a minor printing issue, but quite complicated to fix, so I leave the fix for 3.3.1, it is not a show-stopper. I am done for 3.3. Bye ------------------------------------------------------ SZTE Egyetemi Konyvtar - http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu This message was sent using IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 3:35 AM, Dan McGee<dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
Things *not* getting in 3.3.0: * FS#12950, -D operation (way too big of a change late in the game) * FS#14208, --print operation (once again, not as big as -D, but lets hold off on massive new option addition)
These are maybe not the simplest operations, but they are not really complex either, and they don't affect the rest. Besides, I don't really expect any further changes on them. And I am sure Nagy and I will take the responsibility in the (unlikely :)) case that something bad happens and will provide hot fixes.
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:35:47 -0500 Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
OK, here we go.
We have two basic lists to chop through. One is here: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacman_Roadmap#3.3_Final_Release_Plans. Of course, Xavier blew my (short) list away and tried to sneak in a much longer list. Sorry, but this is not all getting in if we are releasing before the end of the month. :)
So the roadmap: http://bugs.archlinux.org/roadmap/proj3
If I understand correctly, pacman's usage towards the user will be the same? Eg if we include pacman 3.3 on the new release, it should still be compatible with everything we do? Any idea when pacman 3.3 will be in core? Dieter
On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Dieter Plaetinck<dieter@plaetinck.be> wrote:
If I understand correctly, pacman's usage towards the user will be the same? Eg if we include pacman 3.3 on the new release, it should still be compatible with everything we do?
Yes :)
Any idea when pacman 3.3 will be in core?
No :(
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Dan McGee<dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
OK, here we go.
A call for translation updates will come in 2 or 3 days time when we have all messages finalized. You are welcome to start before then, but please do not submit anything until all strings are final.
Translation files have been posted. For those using GIT, you might as well get them from there as these are simply exported from there as of 5 minutes ago: http://code.toofishes.net/pacman/po_files/pacman/ http://code.toofishes.net/pacman/po_files/libalpm/ Xavier or Giovanni- do you guys want to try and get the relevant people informed about these so we can get the required updates? On a related note, I'm going to rebuild pacman-git for both architectures later tonight. Please give any feedback at all from running these as it is the exact software that will go out in a few days as the final 3.3 release. -Dan
2009/7/27, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:
Xavier or Giovanni- do you guys want to try and get the relevant people informed about these so we can get the required updates?
Done! I just sent them an email. -- Arch Linux Developer http://www.archlinux.org http://www.archlinux.it
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Dan McGee<dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
OK, here we go.
A call for translation updates will come in 2 or 3 days time when we have all messages finalized. You are welcome to start before then, but please do not submit anything until all strings are final.
Translation files have been posted. For those using GIT, you might as well get them from there as these are simply exported from there as of 5 minutes ago: http://code.toofishes.net/pacman/po_files/pacman/ http://code.toofishes.net/pacman/po_files/libalpm/
Xavier or Giovanni- do you guys want to try and get the relevant people informed about these so we can get the required updates?
On a related note, I'm going to rebuild pacman-git for both architectures later tonight. Please give any feedback at all from running these as it is the exact software that will go out in a few days as the final 3.3 release.
-Dan
Bad news, guys. I have just found an untranslated sting in src/callback.c: case PM_TRANS_CONV_REMOVE_PKGS: printf(":: the following package(s) cannot be upgraded due to " "unresolvable dependencies:\n"); It was strange that only the next string appears in hu.po ("Do you want to skip..."). I will create a patch for this immediately (check my working repo). Bye ------------------------------------------------------ SZTE Egyetemi Konyvtar - http://www.bibl.u-szeged.hu This message was sent using IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 6:48 AM, Nagy Gabor<ngaba@bibl.u-szeged.hu> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Dan McGee<dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
OK, here we go.
A call for translation updates will come in 2 or 3 days time when we have all messages finalized. You are welcome to start before then, but please do not submit anything until all strings are final.
Translation files have been posted. For those using GIT, you might as well get them from there as these are simply exported from there as of 5 minutes ago: http://code.toofishes.net/pacman/po_files/pacman/ http://code.toofishes.net/pacman/po_files/libalpm/
Xavier or Giovanni- do you guys want to try and get the relevant people informed about these so we can get the required updates?
On a related note, I'm going to rebuild pacman-git for both architectures later tonight. Please give any feedback at all from running these as it is the exact software that will go out in a few days as the final 3.3 release.
-Dan
Bad news, guys. I have just found an untranslated sting in src/callback.c: case PM_TRANS_CONV_REMOVE_PKGS:
printf(":: the following package(s) cannot be upgraded due to " "unresolvable dependencies:\n");
It was strange that only the next string appears in hu.po ("Do you want to skip...").
I will create a patch for this immediately (check my working repo).
I managed to pull your repo before you pushed the patch, but then checked about a minute later and it was there. All pushed out to the main repo now, and I updated the PO files that I put out there. Thanks for the catch. -Dan
2009/7/28, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:
All pushed out to the main repo now, and I updated the PO files that I put out there. Thanks for the catch.
I'm sending a new update Italian translation. -- Arch Linux Developer http://www.archlinux.org http://www.archlinux.it
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Giovanni Scafora<giovanni@archlinux.org> wrote:
2009/7/28, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:
All pushed out to the main repo now, and I updated the PO files that I put out there. Thanks for the catch.
I'm sending a new update Italian translation.
Well, since we just made one change, maybe we could make a few others as well? I nearly finished my translation, but I noticed a missing new line in one string for instance. And there are a few messages that could be better formulated.
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Xavier<shiningxc@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Giovanni Scafora<giovanni@archlinux.org> wrote:
2009/7/28, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:
All pushed out to the main repo now, and I updated the PO files that I put out there. Thanks for the catch.
I'm sending a new update Italian translation.
Well, since we just made one change, maybe we could make a few others as well?
I nearly finished my translation, but I noticed a missing new line in one string for instance.
And there are a few messages that could be better formulated.
We really should have looked more closely at this earlier then... Let's queue any further changes up for 3.3.1. -Dan
2009/7/28, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:
We really should have looked more closely at this earlier then...
Let's queue any further changes up for 3.3.1.
I just sent a NEW update Italian translation in ML. Could you push it to the GIT? -- Arch Linux Developer http://www.archlinux.org http://www.archlinux.it
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Giovanni Scafora<giovanni@archlinux.org> wrote:
2009/7/28, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:
We really should have looked more closely at this earlier then...
Let's queue any further changes up for 3.3.1.
I just sent a NEW update Italian translation in ML. Could you push it to the GIT?
When I'm getting paid $30-$60 an hour to work on this project my turnaround time will be that fast...until then, things are not on fire so just wait it out please. :) -Dan
2009/7/28, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:
When I'm getting paid $30-$60 an hour to work on this project my turnaround time will be that fast...until then, things are not on fire so just wait it out please. :)
I could give you more, about $100 an hour... :-) -- Arch Linux Developer http://www.archlinux.org http://www.archlinux.it
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Giovanni Scafora<giovanni@archlinux.org> wrote:
2009/7/28, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:
When I'm getting paid $30-$60 an hour to work on this project my turnaround time will be that fast...until then, things are not on fire so just wait it out please. :)
I could give you more, about $100 an hour... :-)
What would be a huge help is for anyone to put the translations branch together. This means collecting the various translation updates that have flowed in the last couple of days, getting them into git with the correct author attribution, and making sure they are "clean" and don't change more than necessary. I think we had some tricks with msgfmt last time to do this- does anyone remember? It might have just consisted of importing the new translation file in and then running "make languagecode.po-update". -Dan
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Dan McGee<dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Giovanni Scafora<giovanni@archlinux.org> wrote:
2009/7/28, Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>:
When I'm getting paid $30-$60 an hour to work on this project my turnaround time will be that fast...until then, things are not on fire so just wait it out please. :)
I could give you more, about $100 an hour... :-)
What would be a huge help is for anyone to put the translations branch together. This means collecting the various translation updates that have flowed in the last couple of days, getting them into git with the correct author attribution, and making sure they are "clean" and don't change more than necessary. I think we had some tricks with msgfmt last time to do this- does anyone remember? It might have just consisted of importing the new translation file in and then running "make languagecode.po-update".
If you hadn't noticed, I replied to two translators about an error in their file. It's because I have been doing this work already :) Also I sent a message to the ML (with all translators in CC) about the status of the translations. But it was rejected because of too many recipients. It should be still waiting for approval.
Xavier wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Dan McGee<dpmcgee@gmail.com> wrote:
What would be a huge help is for anyone to put the translations branch together. ...
If you hadn't noticed, I replied to two translators about an error in their file. It's because I have been doing this work already :)
@Xavier: Can you check the zh_CN translation for fix the mentioned here: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/12812#comment37468 Thanks, Allan
participants (6)
-
Allan McRae
-
Dan McGee
-
Dieter Plaetinck
-
Giovanni Scafora
-
Nagy Gabor
-
Xavier