Gnome-terminal gets on the bus

hi

Not really sure who to send this to: does gnome-terminal even have a
maintainer these days?

First there was Bonobo, and it was good for certain things, and sucked
fairly majorly for others, but it was not cross-desktop and all that
stuff that people like, so the good bits of it were replaced by DBus.

Occasionally programs used Bonobo to implement unique program
instances. gnome-terminal was one of them. In the spirit of using DBus
pervasivly throughout the desktop I have ported gnome-terminal to use
this new system

The patch is here:
http://www.openedhand.com/~iain/gnome-terminal-gets-on-the-bus.patch
and is also attached.

lots of love
iain

_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: Gnome-terminal gets on the bus

Hi Iain,

AFAIK (and acoording to the MAINTAINERS file), gnome-terminal is
maintained by Guilherme Pastore (aka fatalerror). I suggest you to
file a bug and try to meet him on IRC. Behdad has been doing some
stuff on this module too.

p eace

--lucasr

2006/6/2, Iain * <iaingnome <at> gmail.com>:
> hi
>
> Not really sure who to send this to: does gnome-terminal even have a
> maintainer these days?
>
> First there was Bonobo, and it was good for certain things, and sucked
> fairly majorly for others, but it was not cross-desktop and all that
> stuff that people like, so the good bits of it were replaced by DBus.
>
> Occasionally programs used Bonobo to implement unique program
> instances. gnome-terminal was one of them. In the spirit of using DBus
> pervasivly throughout the desktop I have ported gnome-terminal to use
> this new system
>
> The patch is here:
> http://www.openedhand.com/~iain/gnome-terminal-gets-on-the-bus.patch
> and is also attached.
>

Re: Gnome-terminal gets on the bus

2006/6/3, Iain * <iaingnome <at> gmail.com>:
> hi
>
> Not really sure who to send this to: does gnome-terminal even have a
> maintainer these days?
>
> First there was Bonobo, and it was good for certain things, and sucked
> fairly majorly for others, but it was not cross-desktop and all that
> stuff that people like, so the good bits of it were replaced by DBus.
>
> Occasionally programs used Bonobo to implement unique program
> instances. gnome-terminal was one of them. In the spirit of using DBus
> pervasivly throughout the desktop I have ported gnome-terminal to use
> this new system

Very cool. Seems to launch way faster than bonobo version too after a
quick test :)
(though that might be 2.14.1 vs CVS too I guess)

> The patch is here:
> http://www.openedhand.com/~iain/gnome-terminal-gets-on-the-bus.patch
> and is also attached.
>
> lots of love
to
> iain

;)

--

-- 

2.15.x: 'loading theme icon for stock' problem persists...

A common [fatal] error reported by a number of applications in the
2.15.x branch is:

        Gtk-WARNING **: Error loading theme icon for stock: Failed to
        open file '': No such file or directory

        GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT
        (object)' failed
        aborting...

Questions:

* Is there a simple work around? 
It is difficult to test 2.15.x with this error in place.

* Any chance that this problem will be resolved any time soon?
I have seen this problem in 2.15.0, 2.15.1, and 2.15.2.

-Joseph

--

-- 
joseph_sacco [at] comcast [dot] net

What happened to Subversion?

Supposedly, Gnome's CVS repositories were about to be converted to
Subversion 18th March this year. It didn't happen and not much have
been written about it on the infrastructure list. So I wonder if the
switch is still planned and when it will happen? I for one, would very
much prefer svn instead of cvs.

--

-- 
mvh Björn Lindqvist

Re: What happened to Subversion?

BJörn Lindqvist wrote:
> Supposedly, Gnome's CVS repositories were about to be converted to
> Subversion 18th March this year. It didn't happen and not much have
> been written about it on the infrastructure list. So I wonder if the
> switch is still planned and when it will happen? I for one, would very
> much prefer svn instead of cvs.

Discussion happened on gnome-hackers; new date is 14th July.

http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-hackers/2006-June

--

-- 
Andrew

Re: What happened to Subversion?

On 6/4/06, BJörn Lindqvist <bjourne <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> Supposedly, Gnome's CVS repositories were about to be converted to
> Subversion 18th March this year. It didn't happen and not much have
> been written about it on the infrastructure list. So I wonder if the
> switch is still planned and when it will happen? I for one, would very
> much prefer svn instead of cvs.

Looks like we failed somewhere to get the word out about
devel-announce-list widely enough.  It's a very low volume list meant
for important announcements.  Granted, as aes mentioned, the general
discussion happened on gnome-hackers but for those who'd prefer to
just get the big announcements, the postponement[1] and new date[2] of
the SVN migration were both announced to devel-announce-list.

[1] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/devel-announce-list/2006-March/msg00003.html
[2] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/devel-announce-list/2006-May/msg00004.html

Re: What happened to Subversion?

> Looks like we failed somewhere to get the word out about
> devel-announce-list widely enough.  It's a very low volume list meant
> for important announcements.  Granted, as aes mentioned, the general
> discussion happened on gnome-hackers but for those who'd prefer to
> just get the big announcements, the postponement[1] and new date[2] of
> the SVN migration were both announced to devel-announce-list.
>
> [1] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/devel-announce-list/2006-March/msg00003.html
> [2] http://mail.gnome.org/archives/devel-announce-list/2006-May/msg00004.html

Then I'm very sorry to have been bothering the wrong list unnecessary.
/me goes and subscribes to yet another mailing list

The new Subversion migration date is fantastic news though.

--

-- 
mvh Björn

Re: Proposal to add Orca to GNOME 2.16

Hi All:

We (the Orca team) have been very busy the past few weeks and would like
to provide more status of where we are with respect to the proposal to
include Orca in GNOME 2.16.  I believe we have implemented the missing
features in Orca that are present in Gnopernicus, and we've also done a
fair amount of stability and testing work.  

We've also broached the subject of including Orca in GNOME 2.16 on
orca-list <at> gnome.org.  The discussion thread can be found here:

http://mail.gnome.org/archives/orca-list/2006-June/msg00002.html

We've received positive feedback thus far (public and private),
including the following message from Baum, the maintainer of
Gnopernicus:

http://mail.gnome.org/archives/orca-list/2006-June/msg00004.html

as well as the following from the Ubuntu accessibility team:

http://mail.gnome.org/archives/orca-list/2006-June/msg00012.html

I believe we are on track here, and we are definitely committed to the
effort.  With the exception of carrying on a discussion on
desktop-devel-list <at> gnome.org, the proposal/acceptance process is still a
mystery to me.  I'd like to make sure we are not missing something
really big here, and I'm curious about what other barriers to adoption
may exist for getting Orca into GNOME 2.16.  We will work hard to
address the issues that arise.

Re: Proposal to add Orca to GNOME 2.16

On 6/6/06, Willie Walker <William.Walker <at> sun.com> wrote:
> We've received positive feedback thus far (public and private),
> including the following message from Baum, the maintainer of
> Gnopernicus:
>
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/orca-list/2006-June/msg00004.html

That email pretty much looks like the clincher to me; it looks to me
like it resolves the only big issue I remember anyone bringing up.

> I believe we are on track here, and we are definitely committed to the
> effort.  With the exception of carrying on a discussion on
> desktop-devel-list <at> gnome.org, the proposal/acceptance process is still a
> mystery to me.  I'd like to make sure we are not missing something
> really big here, and I'm curious about what other barriers to adoption
> may exist for getting Orca into GNOME 2.16.  We will work hard to
> address the issues that arise.

Thanks for your awesome work.  We've kind of sucked at getting the
proposed modules all listed.  Could you go to
http://live.gnome.org/TwoPointFifteen/Desktop and add orca (and, if
you have time, the other proposed modules)?  We should start getting
those into the modulesets going out with releases and doing a better
job of verifying the build and so forth (though I'm betting GARNOME is
ahead in the game and has them included, which would be cool).

As per the schedule at http://live.gnome.org/TwoPointFifteen, the
"Module inclusion discussion heats up" on the week of July 12th.  I
can't imagine why orca wouldn't make it at this point, as it looks
like you've already addressed any potential issues that could come up.