< mclasen> do we have an agenda for today ? < ebassi> the points on the wiki are: < ebassi> o possible change of date for the IRC meetings < ebassi> o gtk+ 2.13 schedule for GNOME 2.24 < ebassi> o removal of the gtk+ 1.2 and 2.0 tutorial from the tarball < ebassi> o overhaul of the gobject tutorial < timj> i have some extra points... < ebassi> okay < timj> - should we add a website bugzilla component? < martyn> timj: yes please :) < timj> if you don't mind, i'd like to handle this first, it's why i asked martyn to join here < timj> so far we had people nagging about two "website bugs" already: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=531754 < timj> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=514882 < timj> martyn and andreas both told me they'd aprechiate a website component. < mclasen> I don't think adding bugzilla components needs a long discussion ... just do it < mclasen> obviously makes sense < timj> ok good. i'll add it to the gtk+ product then. < martyn> thanks < mclasen> timj: do you have more extra points ? < timj> somewhat related, DNS ofr www.gtk.org and gtk.org has been updated now. the website is now hosted on cube.gtk.org which is a site at MIT that can stand high traffic loads < timj> snorfle takes care of it. < timj> ftp and MX hasn't been moved so far. afiu, snorfle wants to extend the current account list or similar so people (mostly mclasen, possibly behdad) can continue to upload stuff. < martyn> timj: thanks for doing that by the way < mclasen> timj: that requires me to make releases first... < timj> mclasen: not the setting up of accounts ;) < timj> mclasen: i have two othe rminor things: < timj> - mclasen asked me about unit test fixes/changes some weeks ago. what exactly did that refer to? < mclasen> I think it may have been in reference to segfaults during make check < mclasen> which have meanwhile been fixed, I believe (there was something wrong with argument handling in gtester, iirc) < timj> - some Imendians (sven, timj, mabe kris, maybe mitch) plan to go to Linuxtag in Berlin in two weeks. < timj> is anyone else going there so setting up a Gtk+ meeting would make sense? < mclasen> I'm not < mclasen> and pretty sure none of the RH gtk people are in Europe at that time < mclasen> Lennart doesn't count... < timj> heh ;) < mclasen> ok, I have another extra point if you are done < timj> done < mclasen> - distribute maintainership more evenly < mclasen> in particular, I'd like to get to a point where me being absent for a month or two doesn't mean that no releases can happen < mclasen> obviously not something we can settle on the spot today, but something to think about < mclasen> so maybe we should just let it sink in until next meeting and get back to the regular agenda < mclasen> do we want to change meeting times ? or is this time good for most people ? < ebassi> it's good for me < mclasen> (I may have to drop out for some 10 minutes for some of the next few Tuesdays but other than that, it is ok for me too < mclasen> seems like we stay with this time then until further notice... < ebassi> mclasen: is the time okay or should we move it? < mclasen> I'm in favor of keeping it < ebassi> okay < timj> mclasen: didn't you say tuesdays conflict with some of your family duties? moving it to a different day would be entirely fine with me for instance < mclasen> timj: as I said, I have to pick up Jan from fencing around the 30 minute mark, but it is only a few more Tuesdays, and only if Sabine is working < mclasen> and it is right around the corner, so I should be back after 10 minutes...you won't even notice that I'm gone < timj> mclasen: i'll look into whether Imendio can provide any release work related resources. other than that, this also sounds like a perfect community task. (in the past, we've had snorfle build and upload releases for instance, though he didn't do a whole lot of hacking on gtk back then) < mclasen> yeah, it can be delgated < mclasen> I should probably update the howto to include more details of what I actually do to make a release happen < mclasen> so that it becomes easier for someone else to do without forgetting something < ebassi> cairo has a nice RELEASING file < timj> mclasen: yes please. do you have the link btw? < ebassi> in git < ebassi> very easy to follow :-) < mclasen> timj: to the howto ? it is in gtk/docs/ in svn < timj> ah thanks < ebassi> about howtos and documentation, there are two points in the agenda regarding the gtk+ and gobject howtos < mclasen> ebassi: we ship 1.x documentation ? < ebassi> can we please remove the gtk+ 1.2 tutorial from svn? and maybe drop the tutorial entirely, since it's clearly unmaintained and it's doing more harm than good? < timj> ebassi: your point indicates we ship the 1.2 tutorial in 2.0 tarballs? < ebassi> somebody arrived on #gtk+ complaining about it - looking at the tarball I can't see it, though :-/ < timj> ebassi: from svn? that is different, i'm currently still building the 1.2 tutorial for web site updates < ebassi> timj: can we move it in the gtk website, then? < mclasen> or move it to www.gtk1.org < ebassi> on the whole issue, I'm a little drastic: I don't think we should ship the tutorial anymore < ebassi> timj: it's not like it's changing < ebassi> timj: both of them, actually :-) * mclasen agrees < timj> ebassi: i'm using: svn co http://svn.gnome.org/svn/gtk+/branches/gtk-1-2/docs < ebassi> timj: the 1.x tutorial is still in trunk < timj> ebassi: i think we should definitely keep the tutorial in the gtk-1-2 branch, but if its still present in trunk it should be removed there < ebassi> http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/gtk%2B/trunk/docs/tutorial/gtk_tut.sgml?revision=12327&view=markup < timj> ebassi: i'm fine with not shipping the 2.0 tutorial in the tarballs, as long as the tarball has prominent links to the online version. and of course, the 2.0 tutorial shouldn't be removed from trunk * mclasen thinks the only hope of getting any updates for this is to integrate it in the regular docs < timj> ebassi: unless anone disagrees, can you turn this into action items please? (remove 1.2 from trunk, remove 2.0 from tarball builds, add 2.0 links) < ebassi> timj: doing it right now < ebassi> :-) < timj> great < mclasen> wrt to the gtk+ 2.13 schedule for GNOME 2.24 < mclasen> I think I want to take the rest of the week to get an overview of the state of trunk and do a devel snapshot early next week < ebassi> we still have some minor api stuff, like the gtk_show_uri() call < ebassi> which blocks on GtkMountOperation, afair < mclasen> yeah, that too, is on my list to look at < timj> mclasen: i plan to get gtk_widget_snapshot() into trunk this or next week (i.e. before linuxtag) < mclasen> I have probably missed discussion of that while I was off in Fedoraland - that is offscreen rendering, I assume ? < ebassi> minus event redirection, yes < mitchAFK> i guess i missed the party... < timj> mclasen: correct, just the rendering. < mclasen> here is a proposal: should we collect a list of outstanding 2.13 items by next week ? < timj> not sure, when is 2.13 due? < timj> Kris for instance will only be back next week (vacations atm) < mclasen> the original plan called for a guadec release < mclasen> anyway, it makes sense to wait for kris to return < ebassi> the next meeting is in two weeks anyway, so there's time I guess < mclasen> ok < timj> btw, ebassi are you going to upload the meeting logs? < ebassi> timj: yes < mclasen> what about the last point on your agenda, o overhaul of the gobject tutorial ? < mclasen> did we cover that ? < ebassi> mclasen: oh, yeah < timj> we've been having and forgetting those on and off during the past and should really fix that < ebassi> timj: I'll send the minutes on the list as well < timj> ebassi: thanks, much aprechiated < ebassi> timj: I've been bad with those, sorry :-/ < ebassi> mclasen: the gobject tutorial is insanely bad; I've been trying to salvage it, but the whole section on the signals is borked < ebassi> as I said on the bug, I'll try to get it done before 2.14 < ebassi> if anyone has ideas for the tutorial, I'd like to hear them (even in private mail) < ebassi> because as it is, it's actually worse than the gtk tutorial: it teaches bad practises < mclasen> hmm * mclasen has to go < timj> ebassi: feel free to send me moderately small chunks for review if that helps. (experience shows that as the size of review chunks increases, chances go down for a quick review fomr my part... ;( ) < mclasen> see you guys in two weeks then < ebassi> timj: okay, will do < ebassi> mclasen: see you :-) < mclasen> as I said, I'm aiming for a devel snapshot next week < timj> mclasen: sounds good.