Hi Could we set some release goals for 0.0.37? I suggest we release sooner rather than later to put the various little build problems behind us. So my only high-priority item for 0.037 at the moment is to port Scintilla to Linux and OS X. I will gladly accept other feature, bugfix and doc patches. Anything else we''d like to be sure to do? alex
> Anything else we''d like to be sure to do?I would like to see the printing patch I just sent added in. Sean
Sean Long wrote:>> Anything else we''d like to be sure to do? >> > > I would like to see the printing patch I just sent added in. > >Sean, I haven''t seen any printing patches recently. Can you re-send them or did they not go out yet? Roy
Alex Fenton wrote:> Could we set some release goals for 0.0.37? I suggest we release sooner > rather than later to put the various little build problems behind us. > > So my only high-priority item for 0.037 at the moment is to port > Scintilla to Linux and OS X. I will gladly accept other feature, bugfix > and doc patches. > > Anything else we''d like to be sure to do?I would like to address the TODO file (even if it''s removing obsolete items and re-prioritizing the existing items) Also, I would like to update the wiki and perhaps README (or create a new BUILDING) file to discuss the proper flags and options for each component of the build process on each platform. One of the biggest problems we have is building properly on all platforms. Finally, I think we might want to implement Drag and Drop and Clipboard Roy
Roy Sutton wrote:>> Anything else we''d like to be sure to do? >> > I would like to address the TODO file (even if it''s removing obsolete > items and re-prioritizing the existing items) >Sounds good. I have been updating it before the last few releases. There is internals stuff in there I do not really understand, but suspect is obsolete.> Also, I would like to update the wiki and perhaps README (or create a > new BUILDING) file to discuss the proper flags and options for each > component of the build process on each platform. >Sounds good. After the thread on c.l.r I asked Tom to resync the mirrors so they definitely have the current Intel OSX gem, which shouldn''t require libpng. I started a page on the wiki last week on this http://wxruby.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Release_HowTo> Finally, I think we might want to implement Drag and Drop and Clipboard >It would be nice to have, but I don''t think it''s indispensable to 0.0.37. Must do for 1.9 though. Dnd/Clipboard is a tough one - the main problem I have run into is that there is an unexposed base class DataObjectBase, and unclear which methods where should be virtual. From reading the header files, I think if someone with l33t skills could fix DataObjectSimple then the others should fall into place reasonably easily. alex
Alex Fenton wrote:> Roy Sutton wrote: >>> Anything else we''d like to be sure to do? >>> >> I would like to address the TODO file (even if it''s removing obsolete >> items and re-prioritizing the existing items) >> > Sounds good. I have been updating it before the last few releases. There > is internals stuff in there I do not really understand, but suspect is > obsolete.I can try to take a look at the TODO in the next couple days, but definitely don''t consider it a .37 showstopper.>> Also, I would like to update the wiki and perhaps README (or create a >> new BUILDING) file to discuss the proper flags and options for each >> component of the build process on each platform. >> > Sounds good. After the thread on c.l.r I asked Tom to resync the mirrors > so they definitely have the current Intel OSX gem, which shouldn''t > require libpng.This is probably the #1 reason to push a .37 asap. For me, it is probably the only fix that absolutely has to be in .37. I don''t think sync''ing mirrors is really enough, because bad copies of .36 are floating around out there.> I started a page on the wiki last week on this > http://wxruby.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.pl?Release_HowTo > >> Finally, I think we might want to implement Drag and Drop and Clipboard >> > It would be nice to have, but I don''t think it''s indispensable to > 0.0.37. Must do for 1.9 though.Agree.> > Dnd/Clipboard is a tough one - the main problem I have run into is that > there is an unexposed base class DataObjectBase, and unclear which > methods where should be virtual. > > From reading the header files, I think if someone with l33t skills > could fix DataObjectSimple then the others should fall into place > reasonably easily.Maybe I''ll have time this weekend to take a look, if that''s the most important "deep" C++ issue we have. Kevin