On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 04:46:46PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote:
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 12:07:04AM +0100, v4hn wrote:
Sorry to comment here, but could you _please_ just get an official version out that supports fltk 1.3.3? This issue is pending way too long in my opinion.
You can always pack the last repo. There's no need to wait for an official release, unless you're packaging for a distro and have to follow policy.
If that's the case, I'd like to know what distro you're using, because it looks quite on the edge, and I may also consider giving it a look/try!
I'm one of the maintainers of lunar-linux(.org), which basically is an automated LFS with some bash scripts for package management. We try to stay "on the edge" these days, although this introduces problems like the fltk<->dillo incompatibility every now and then. But we also explicitly feature vanilla software, so we only introduce distribution specific patches if absolutely required (unlike basically all other distributions I know). So yes, if this takes much longer, it's probably better to package the RC than to keep a broken dillo module around.
On the release side of things, that's the normal procedure. Produce a stable repo, then the RCs, test, rinse&repeat. Boring, but much better than to have to hurry-patch a bogus release.
Sure, but imho eocene is completely right with what he wrote earlier: This was supposed to be version 3.0.4.1 to address the fltk problem quickely and some patches even were rejected for this release because they would change too much for such a release. By now this feels much more like 3.0.5 and it could probably also include the dicache fixes eocene mentioned on the list...
If nobody reports problems today, tomorrow there'll be another rc tarball for the usual tests. Let's hope it can become final.
As always, thanks for dillo, v4hn