next snapshot (Re: kdesupport/qt-dbus)

[David Faure]

On Monday 19 June 2006 01:09, Matt Rogers wrote:
> On Sunday 18 June 2006 18:01, Matt Rogers wrote:
> > On Sunday 18 June 2006 15:43, David Faure wrote:
> > > On Sunday 18 June 2006 16:37, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > > SVN commit 552611 by thiago:
> > > >
> > > > Introduce the new QtDBus type marshaller/demarshaller system, dubbed
> > > > "Pattern Buffer". This change is binary-incompatible, but
> > > > source-compatible. If you can't afford to rebuild everything, please
> > > > wait until the next kdelibs snapshot (which should happen tomorrow).
> > >
> > > OK. Actually I said last week "we should wait until all main modules are
> > > ported to dbus before making more snapshot updates", but if there are
> > > changes that actually help with the porting, then that's a reason to
> > > update the snapshot indeed. Well, technically those are changes in
> > > qtdbus, not in kdelibs, but while we have to recompile kdelibs, we might
> > > as well update it if it doesn't bring in more API changes to port to.
> >
> > I will argue that the only thing that needs to be updated is the relevant
> > revisions that are related to the dbus changes. Updating the snapshot more
> > often only creates problems for those who expect to have a decently stable
> > base to port against, since that's what the snapshot is for.

Well as this discussion points out, there is -more- work involved in porting kded modules
if we don't apply the api change to the snapshot (adding manual registration and then removing
it would be pretty useless work).
But I agree with your line of thought in general. It's just that in this case, I only
see changes that will help, not changes that will make things more difficult.

> > The recreation of the snapshot last monday completely violated that
> > expectation. We might have well have been using trunk in that case.

Not last monday then, but the one before that.

> > these are the only things that come up because you updated the snapshot
> > last week. Otherwise, the list would be longer.

Yes, I brought in tons of dbus-related fixes, but I also brought in KDialog/KDialogBase
stuff which was more work than expected, sorry for that. But that's the past now.

> just so it's clear, I'm not upset about the snapshot being updated. What I am 
> upset about is the lack of an announcement or some other kind of warning 
> (and, of course, I may have missed it) that would have allowed me to prepare 
> for the pain. All I'm really asking for is that better attempts are made to 
> communicate and manage expectations so that we know things will be broken 
> (w/o having to throughly read kde-commits). IMHO, this is what 
> kde-cvs-announce is for.

No (that's for reaching -all- contributors, including translators etc.)
This is what kde-core-devel is for, and this is why I'm discussing the next update
before it's being done tomorrow, having learned from the last update.

-- 
David Faure, faure at kde.org, sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE,
Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org).