[Adium-devl] GSoC 2007 student branches
timber at lava.net
Wed May 30 16:13:36 UTC 2007
On May 30, 2007, at 8:55 AM, David Smith wrote:
> On May 30, 2007, at 8:28 AM, Colin Barrett wrote:
>> On May 30, 2007, at 8:14 AM, Evan Schoenberg wrote:
>>> On May 30, 2007, at 10:40 AM, Colin Barrett wrote:
>>>> I would not be opposed to doing this after it has gotten
>>>> testing. Part of the problem with 1.0.3 was bumping libpurple.
>>>> However, using *only* released versions of libpurple, plus
>>>> perhaps a
>>>> (very) small, known set of patches we've apply, would definitely
>>>> be a
>>>> policy I would support.
>>> That's what I was angling towards - we should be using releases of
>>> our libraries wherever possible.
>>> I definitely wasn't saying we should move to libpurple 2.0.1 and
>>> simply release -- our own quality control and beta process still
>>> needs to be in effect. If someone is interested in handling a 1.0.5
>>> beta... or, for that matter, a 1.1 beta... after updating to
>>> libpurple 2.0.1, I think that ball should be gotten rolling.
>> How large is the diff between what we have now and 2.0.1?
> 1.0.4's libpurple -> libpurple 2.0.1 will get us some rather nice
> bug fixes. Trunk already has the best of the lot.
I don't doubt it. I'm just curious about risk, really. If it's a huge
hunk-o-changes, maybe we want to hold up and not do it (or only grab
some of the changes) for 1.0.x, which should IMO focus on stability at
this point, what with 1.1 almost out.
We (I) really, really don't want to have to do a 1.0.6. Ugh.
More information about the Adium-devl