SIPE/XMPP/VV/etc. and external contributions
salinasv at gmail.com
Fri Dec 12 16:40:32 EST 2014
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Ethan Blanton <elb at pidgin.im> wrote:
> Niklas et al. asked a while back about the status of Pidgin 3, and we
> had some brief discussions both here and in devel at cpi about the status
> of 3.0, 2.11, etc. As part of these discussions, I renewed a
> conversation Niklas had had some time ago about getting them unstuck.
> I think the work they are doing to bring VV to SIPE and improve the VV
> stack for XMPP and other protocols is something we should be
> supporting; I know Daniel has reviewed and commented on some of their
> patches, but I'm not sure if anyone else has. I know I haven't, and I
> don't know when I will, because I simply don't have time. That's
> where this email comes from.
I just moved to use pidgin as substitute for communicator at work and I
plan to test this branch o 3.0.0 but I haven't got the time to even compile
pidgin on this box. I will try to send as much feedback as possible.
> We're at a point in this project were developer energy is at a
> premium. This team represents external energy that I would hate to
> see lost because we don't have the energy to review everything they
> With that in mind, I'd like to propose that we give commit access to
> someone from their team, and let them commit directly to a branch on
> pidgin.im. The goal would be to eventually having them staging and
> moving their commits directly to default/release-2.x.y to provide
> improvements and extensions that they can use and that can be adopted
> by other protocols in a more timely fashion. Niklas has suggested
> that Jakub (one of the SIPE maintainers) would be a good contact for
> I want to see whatever of their changes are ready and API-appropriate
> moved into 2.x.y for a 2.11.0 release sooner rather than later, and I
> am hopeful that they can help us get VV 3.0-ready on the default
> branch as part of their refining process.
> Thoughts? (If you don't want to send them to the group, feel free to
> send them directly to me.)
I think it is a good idea, it also will give their changes more visibility
from the commit mailing list so we can all review the patches on a smaller
scope than just reviewing a big change set on one chunk.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Devel