D-Bus core due for a release?

[Ralf Habacker]

Havoc Pennington schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> Simon McVittie wrote:
>   
>> We haven't had a release for over 5 months, and the patches are starting
>> to build up... in particular, for Telepathy's Tubes technology
>> (particularly on the OLPC) it would be useful to have a stable release
>> that includes the message marshal/unmarshal support. dbus-1.1.0, anyone?
>> (Or 1.0.3, if that's preferred... I'm slightly unclear on the versioning
>> policy used.)
>>     
>
> For major.minor.micro, odd minor = unstable/beta, even minor = 
> stable/frozen.
>
> 1.0.x = current stable branch, bugfixes only
> 1.1.x = pre-release snapshots for 1.2.x, here we put new features
> 1.2.x = future stable release (not yet made)
>
>   
>> I'm happy to do the release building/tagging/etc. if necessary.
>>     
>
> That would be cool. There are instructions for this in HACKING iirc (if 
> there are gaps in the instructions, please get them filled in before 
> acting).
>
>   
>> Changes include:
>>
>> Features:
>> * D-Bus message <-> byte array marshalling/unmarshalling as public API
>>     
>
> This would be a 1.2 feature. Right now I think it's the only new feature 
> pretty much that would really lead to a 1.2, so I'm not sure a 1.2 
> release is worth it yet; but doing a 1.1.x is worthwhile anyway.
>
> The original 1.2 dream was win32 port and system bus activation, but 
> both of those are moving much too slowly to get to 1.2 anytime soon, afaik.
>   
The recent win32 dbus efforts are initiated because dbus is a KDE 
requirement and in the recent state it is usable by many KDE users 
without any problems. Contribution to the win32 dbus code in relation to 
KDE would come only if there are issues with recent code. I got only a 
very few bug reports mostly caused by an outdated version.  In fact also 
developers working for trolltech told me, that dbus win32 works fine 
with Qt.
I personally recognized that dbus has connection problems running on 
windows 2003 server but noone else reported this too, so I assume no 
else needs this. 
Additional for KDE win32 there are much more annoying building sites, 
which requires all available time of the developers.

I think more contributions will come if dbus would be used by other 
applications. I think that win32 binary releases on freedesktop may be 
help to attract other developers. Is there a place to put such packages 
on freedesktop org ?

> Maybe we should just do a 1.2 then with what we have, or at least plan 
> to do one soon.
>
> Either way the first step is a 1.1.x beta, so if you want to do that it 
> would start us down the road.
>
>   
>> * allow eavesdropping on method replies on the session bus, making
>>   dbus-monitor a substantially better debug tool
>> * add daemondir to .pc file
>>     
>
> These should both be backported to 1.0.x if it was not done at commit 
> time (people keep failing to do this, bad people), and we should do a 
> 1.0.x with these in it.
>
>   
>> * lots of Win32 stuff including a CMake build system
>>     
>
> This is 1.1.x only
>
>   
>> * possibly the user database (it's unclear whether this made it into 1.0.2)
>>     
>
> Not sure I remember the current state here, but I thought there was a 
> patch that needed some performance testing before we put it in.
>
>   
>> Fixes:
>> * spec clarifications regarding the reserved local path/interface
>> * rejection of zero-length bus addresses
>> * increased resource limits
>> * fix fd.o #10781 (invalid fd check)
>>     
>
> These should all be in a 1.0.x release so would need backporting if they 
> were not committed to both branches.
>
> I'm sure "backporting" is just a matter of checking out both branches, 
> doing the diff -rwhatever -rwhatever from HEAD and committing the 
> resulting patch to 1.0.x, the two trees are similar enough there should 
> not really be much patch massaging or actual work in order to backport.
>
> diffing the ChangeLog between the two branches may be enough to show 
> which patches were not applied to stable that should have been.
>
> If you spend a lot of time on this feel free to flame people about how 
> in the future they should commit to both branches :-P
>
> It might be worth doing a 1.0.x even if you don't have time to backport 
> all the fixes that should be, on the 'something is better than nothing' 
> principle.
>
> Havoc
>
> _______________________________________________
> dbus mailing list
> dbus at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dbus
>