[Xcb] Next Release? (was: [PATCH] Build xcb-xkb by default)

[Bart Massey]

Don't really have anything to add except thanks Uli for taking this
on! Hopefully those following XCB more closely than I can figure out
what should happen. :-) --Bart

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Uli Schlachter <psychon at znc.in> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Hi,
>
> on IRC, someone (*cough* Daniel Stone *cough*) asked about the next release
> again. Apparently, having working xcb-xkb and xcb-sync is kind of a big deal.
>
> So let's make a list of issues which could block a release:
>
> On 06.08.2013 19:55, Uli Schlachter wrote:
> [...]
>> Also, we have "fix deadlock with xcb_take_socket/return_socket v3" in git
>> and I think I remember that someone wanted some more testing & making sure
>> that this commit is good before doing a release.
>
> Jamey asked for holding back releases until we have some clear picture on
> this. I don't want to try to summarize the discussion, so the relevant mail
> (and the thread that it belongs to) can be found here:
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/2013-June/008340.html
>
> There is also the following patch from Christian and the replies to it.
> However, I don't mind ignoring it for now (but would be happy if we could
> reach some consensus about it):
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/2013-May/008272.html
>
> [...]
>> Also, I just remembered that there is a bug against xcb-xkb:
>> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=51295
>
> It seems like the general consensus here is that this can be ignored for now.
> I don't have any strong opinions about this, mostly because I have not much
> clue about xcb-xkb.
>
> There are also lots of new patches on the list (Thanks Daniel Martin and Ran
> Benita!). Of these, only "A few more XKB fixes" sounds important. The last
> patch of that series was NAK'd, the first two are fine to go in?
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/2013-August/008509.html
>
> And of course there are the branches that Daniel Martin prepared to make
> merging patches easier for the lazy of us. Sadly, I haven't had the time to
> look at this again.
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/2013-August/008527.html
>
> [This is the time and place where you write a reply and list all the issues
> that I forgot about]
>
> Cheers,
> Uli
>
> P.S.: We want new libxcb and xcb-proto releases, right? We need libxcb to
> enable xcb-xkb by default and xcb-proto for lots of random fixes? Does this
> mean, that the new libxcb should depend on thw new xcb-proto release?
>
> P.P.S: Are we aiming for libxcb 1.10 and xcb-proto 1.9? Or both 1.10 and proto
> skips 1.9? Or something completely different?
> - --
> - - Captain, I think I should tell you I've never
>   actually landed a starship before.
> - - That's all right, Lieutenant, neither have I.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJSDj8+AAoJECLkKOvLj8sG7MwH/0Ve6vMi3JtTNCmKdeRteW2L
> OzrnNmnyVRtdISK+xlnB7QqOoRjA+RrI/kZ0RyzV0lusMLEWWoB605DSoeNlr4Dl
> 4pxJdjnwBwABKE31EO8dbtS6vwGBcHFHWqQVR++1F5obTu6HnjeC4Ir/8iw2Nw9e
> z/zTUIDxPtMNH8dVfFiTum9jXpMclD6f6MVRuBm9RE9PRCBmaeQ3sGRv9/SEEsk5
> 9w+/xqcS59Fzqm935JPLr7lopiJ/XgYRvS2Rzr5NQc13ghDxQrYIy8topmZod2Oz
> Wzs4OGYAPd13sYR38Uu7+E8nY7TjlxtelV0HNV9lbRSZHnXfKd8HDeRmX5YUGL0=
> =g8OM
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Xcb mailing list
> Xcb at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xcb