X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 08:59:27 -0800 From: Andrew Poelstra To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] PCB sync request for the upcoming Ubuntu long term support release Message-ID: <20111217165927.GB30970@malakian.lan> References: <20111216183708 DOT GA30970 AT malakian DOT lan> <201112161846 DOT pBGIkNfG021985 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <4EECC553 DOT 2010003 AT unige DOT ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4EECC553.2010003@unige.ch> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 05:37:39PM +0100, Juergen Harms wrote: > >... solid enough ... take take those that should be in this bug release > > That is (necessarily) subjective. Personally, I have recently seen 2 > (for me) show stoppers for pcb (I cannot judge gschem): > - the misplaced plated-drill layer (if I understand right: fix or > workaround available for a stable release) > - the "tests-fail bugs" (probably only on i3(5)86 platforms (#883768 > - fix committed, #860037, very visible since it throws test > failures, but no important consequences - I do not know the status) > I have pushed a fix for the plated-drill issue. The test failure is not something a user would see, nor is it a "real" problem. So, worst case we can just disable that test and call it a day. IMHO, we should just change the test to output a higher-resolution picture to avoid rounding errors. In fact, if there is no opposition, I will push such a change in the next couple of days. > As long as these bugs are around, I would think that the "naive" > user who gets pcb as a stable item of "his distro" is better off > with the older releases - hence, I would not publish a new rpm to > become available with Mageia 2 (official release forseen for the > month of mai). I have not been sufficiently involved to judge > whether other bugs should be added to this show-stopper category. > Let's not forget that pcb 20100929 is -far- from bug-free, and that's what we're stepping up from. (As I recall, it was so bad at deciding what I was trying to click on, it was nearly unusable to me. That, and there were rounding errors -everywhere-.) So, to me, a showstopper is: a save/load error (including exporters and i18n bugs), or a segfault. > Could this be a reasonable approach: along the feedback to your > question, and with your insight, you create a candidate for a > "stable release" that can be suggested for testing - and that you > explicitely signal as such - (for test by involved users, distro > maintainers; taking my example, not exhaustive tests: I, for > instance, could not test any x86 packages, and would try to check > with 1 or 2 layouts I recently did - mutch more representative if > there would be a variety of test environments). With the "next mai" > deadline of the oncoming Ubuntu and Mageia releases, there should be > no serious timing problems. > This sounds fine to me, if DJ has the time and will to put out a couple of RCs. -- Andrew Poelstra Email: asp11 at sfu.ca OR apoelstra at wpsoftware.net Web: http://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew "I don't understand. Are you saying dualism is always good, or always bad?"