dbus/tools dbus-monitor.c,1.16,1.17

Havoc Pennington hp at redhat.com
Wed Nov 8 09:27:38 PST 2006

John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> While I have your ear, are the TODO items on documentation still valid.
> I saw you commit a bunch to the docs and want to know what is left.  I
> am going through the ChangeLog right now and adding anyone who committed
> or sent a patch into the AUTHORS file.

I fixed up the README, FAQ, and Wiki to say the ABI is now stable. May 
have missed some places but I think that TODO is done.

I didn't update the spec on this topic, I can do it tonight if you want.

I just added the TODO about the configure flags docs in the README being 
outdated. You could just delete that part of the README, or change it to 
only document flags that we might want to say more about (such as the 
enable/disable asserts, verbose, checks options where it isn't clear 
when to set them)

If you're updating AUTHORS then I think we're in good shape as far as I 
know. Maybe make distcheck, tag 1_0_0, post an "any objections?" for 24 
hours, then post the tarball and announce - if we get objections the tag 
can be moved.

BTW I added stuff to the README about how to name the release (1.0.0 not 
1.0), branch names, etc. - I picked fairly arbitrary rules, but if you 
want to do it differently let's be sure what you do is in the README so 
we do the same thing consistently for future releases.

Also, I documented a couple "policy decisions" - one about not freezing 
the internal reimplementation/static-linking interface I posted about 
earlier, another is to NOT put 1.0.0 on the spec itself, only the lib. 
The protocol is frozen, but the spec just is not really finished. If 
people disagree with these then feel free to discuss.


More information about the dbus mailing list