Davyd McColl | 5 Oct 09:23 2010
Picon

I'm a little confused...

Please, bear with me here -- this may come across as a little ranty. I'm just very confused about something.

Tomboy Notes is a great piece of software. It's convenient, it's smart, it doesn't get in the way. Best of all, it's cross-platform. At least, it's /supposed to be/.

As far as I can tell, one of the greatest motivators for chosing .NET/Mono would be the platform agnosticism. Actually, being a little facetious here, I can't come up with another good reason to go that route, especially with a project that has its roots in a *nix world. Not that I'm advocating using a different language/library/platform/whatever. A tool for a task, I say, and if you can accomplish your task neatly with tool X, then why should I care that you're not using tool Y? The answer is that I don't. Even though .NET provides performance penalties (I could elaborate, but I'm trying to remain less ranty).

I'm not another Stallman who thinks that Mono must be evil because of its ties to .NET and That Other Operating System. Nay, I choose to run Ubuntu at home (for many reasons) and have to run Windows 7 at work. Again, a tool for a task. Our client software is Windows-based, so it kinda makes sense that a lot of dev happens in Windows. What really made my propeller-beanie spin was that I could finally stop emailing myself with bright ideas that I had at home or notes for home-time from work. I could just put it in a note and use Ubuntu One to sync my notes. Masterful!

A day or two ago, I had a bug, which, as a good user, I reported and which has been fixed, apparently (https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=624885)

What bothers me about the .NET/Mono choice is simply this: despite the fact that choosing .NET/Mono as a platform would seem to make x-platform releases part of the cycle, despite the fact that there is a win32 installer (1.3.2, quite far behind the curve: some digging shows that there are a 1.4 releases and a new 1.5 release out). At least, these releases are available as source, which is great and all, but bear in mind that most win32 users don't have a *nix build environment. In fact, most win32 users are starved of *any* kind of dev tools, though I suppose they could download Monodevelop and friends (or VS2008 and the gtk-sharp stuff, I suppose) and work with that. A tad of an overkill for a 2.5mb install-size app to have to go get all of that, but it's possible. What would make it more difficult though is that the project is set up in good old Makefiles and a configure script. Easy on *nix, NOT HAPPENING on win32. I tried. For one thing, my win32 build of sh can't fork(), though I'm sure that's the least of my problems. Again, perhaps I could work around this with Cygwin, but that's also quite an overkill for getting a binary from a project which purports cross-platform targets.

I see this quite often: in the *nix world, we tend to forget that our lowly win32 brothers generally don't have build systems on their machines -- and if they do, they are probably Visual Studio build systems. As cross-platform devs, we (and I include myself here, because I've had to do the same) need to learn that some target platforms are just not candidates for source releases.

I guess what I'm drilling on about in such length is that Tomboy is a great app with great x-platform usage. Pity that it's really only available for *nix users, since the win32 build is well outdated and buggy. I don't see the point in choosing a heavier platform with known overheads beyond that of native C/C++ if no-one takes advantage of the greatest benefit of the platform: releases for all OSs where the platform is supported.
So I guess what I'm saying is that if the Tomboy devs can't be bothered to make win32 binary releases on a regular basis (and will rather tell people to compile it themselves: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=631286#c6), then perhaps the devs need to re-evaluate their end-goals. Is this to be a x-platform note-taker with sync abilities or not? I *truly* hope it is because there's no project that I've tried out there which comes even close.


--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
The competent programmer is fully aware of the limited size of his own skull. He therefore approaches his task with full humility, and avoids clever tricks like the plague.
- Djikstra.

_______________________________________________
Tomboy-list mailing list
Tomboy-list@...
http://lists.beatniksoftware.com/listinfo.cgi/tomboy-list-beatniksoftware.com
Benjamin Podszun | 5 Oct 11:07 2010
Picon

Re: I'm a little confused...

Hi.

I'm ignoring the mono part of the mail - as I don't see the point.

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Davyd McColl <davydm@...> wrote:
> A day or two ago, I had a bug, which, as a good user, I reported and which
> has been fixed, apparently
> (https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=624885)

This seems to be your core issue.

> What bothers me about the .NET/Mono choice is simply this: despite the fact
> that choosing .NET/Mono as a platform would seem to make x-platform releases
> part of the cycle, despite the fact that there is a win32 installer (1.3.2,
> quite far behind the curve: some digging shows that there are a 1.4 releases
> and a new 1.5 release out).

This is where your research failed you. The last published release
(with release notes, announcement etc.) is the one that you used (and
that contains the mentioned bug). Both the tarball on the site and the
msi are for the last unstable release, 1.3.2.
Now - the point that you _could_ make is this: 1.4.0 (and 1.4.1 as a
point release for Windows, to fix the bug that is bothering you right
now) is tagged in git. As far as I understand it should've been
released yesterday, on the 4th of October. Sandy's doing a great job
as a maintainer, but I guess personal life stopped him from doing the
related work, namely
- Announcing the new version
- Updating the site
- Uploading a new tarball and msi (at the same time...)

In other words: There is no (completed) release 1.4.x yet. It wasn't
announced so far, the homepage wasn't updated and no tarball has been
uploaded. That's platform agnostic and no discrimination against
Windows or something.. It probably just means that the (fabulous) guy
doing all the work was busy with other things and didn't have time to
follow roughly these steps: [1]

> At least, these releases are available as
> source, which is great and all, but bear in mind that most win32 users don't
> have a *nix build environment. In fact, most win32 users are starved of
> *any* kind of dev tools, though I suppose they could download Monodevelop
> and friends (or VS2008 and the gtk-sharp stuff, I suppose) and work with
> that. A tad of an overkill for a 2.5mb install-size app to have to go get
> all of that, but it's possible. What would make it more difficult though is
> that the project is set up in good old Makefiles and a configure script.
> Easy on *nix, NOT HAPPENING on win32. I tried. For one thing, my win32 build
> of sh can't fork(), though I'm sure that's the least of my problems. Again,
> perhaps I could work around this with Cygwin, but that's also quite an
> overkill for getting a binary from a project which purports cross-platform
> targets.

Again, I fail to see the point. For one, we're providing the msi at
the same time as the tarball. On the other hand we don't rely on
autoconf/autotools on Windows. Building the project on Windows uses
MSBuild, and is as easy as typing "msbuild Tomboy.sln" if you happen
to have the software around (or use SharpDevelop, MonoDevelop,
VisualStudio Express or whatever. Nothing *nixy about the process
though). Which we don't require, mind you.

> I guess what I'm drilling on about in such length is that Tomboy is a great
> app with great x-platform usage. Pity that it's really only available for
> *nix users, since the win32 build is well outdated and buggy.

I guess this is the part that's really, really wrong. See above. 1.4.1
was tagged in git on the 4th of October, roughly 13 hours before you
wrote your mail.

> So I guess what I'm saying is that if the Tomboy devs can't be bothered to
> make win32 binary releases on a regular basis (and will rather tell people
> to compile it themselves:
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=631286#c6), then perhaps the devs
> need to re-evaluate their end-goals. Is this to be a x-platform note-taker
> with sync abilities or not? I *truly* hope it is because there's no project
> that I've tried out there which comes even close.

See, this is were I completely lost. Looking at my comment in that bug
it certainly seems to me that I said that you have 3(!) options, only
one of those was "Go compile it yourself/use the source". The other
two were

- Wait for the release

This was promised to be available very soon (yesterday or today) in
the original bug report,
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=624885, a mere 10 minutes
after the comment you quote above

- Send me a line if it's urgent and I'll personally provide you with a
fixed installer right away

I seriously fail to see the attitude you are describing here, but I'll
blame it on using not my native language (and on the often ambiguous
text medium).

So, the bottom line from my personal point of view is:

1) Your bug was reacted on in a matter of minutes. You reminded us of
a bug/patch that didn't make the "current" (i.e. the one that was
announced to the public on the Tomboy project site at the time of your
bug report) releases nor hit the git repository, thanks for that.

2) The timing was kind of special, because Tomboy follows the Gnome
release cycle and yesterday was supposed to be a release date. Refer
to [1] to see what is part of a release for us (and note the Windows
part).

3) The maintainer said right away that he supports doing a 1.4.1 point
release for Windows only, again mere minutes after your report and
just for that fix.

I can hardly see a way to react faster/better (ignoring the fact that
the bug could and arguably should have been fixed already).

My long response is kind of a contra-rant, because my setup is just
about the same as yours (swap Fedora for Ubuntu at home, but let's
ignore that) and I'm spending most of my time on Windows 7, due to my
work requirements. I'd argue that the situation for Windows release is
good and stable for a looong time and we (me included) still try to
improve it actively (both the "contribute on Windows" situation and
the general Windows specific(!) "end user" experience).

You have an open source project that originated on Linux and supports
two build systems, one for Linux, one for trivially easy Windows
builds (not for the end user, obviously). That even supports your
Windows 7 jump lists (not my work, but I'm highly addicted to that
feature) and comes with a usable, standard MSI (not some self
extracting zip or 3rd party installer software) for quite a long time.

Please be assured that Tomboy on Windows is one release among 3 equals
(I'd even argue that in the past it was two "equal" releases for Linux
and Windows and one that received lesser love for OS X, partly because
all the things different over there, be it hotkeys, the unified menu
bar etc.. The situation for that release improved quite a bit as well,
though).

The msi that should make the 1.4 announcement can currently be found
at [2]. I cannot upload to that gnome ftp so you're free to either
wait for Sandy/Paul to grab the file and in the right place (probably
_after_ doing the release chore in [2]) or you take it from my link
right now.

Ben

1: http://live.gnome.org/Tomboy/ReleaseChecklist
2: http://ben.sh/Tomboy-1.4.1.msi
Davyd McColl | 5 Oct 14:09 2010
Picon

Re: I'm a little confused...



On 5 October 2010 11:07, Benjamin Podszun <benjamin.podszun-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:

This is where your research failed you.
Sorry, I was then badly misled by the wording in the bug reports to have understood that the source tarballs that I found under http://ftp.acc.umu.se/pub/GNOME/sources/tomboy/ (every release > 1.3.2) were actually of release quality. Most especially, talk of streamlining code into a 1.5 release when the 1.3 is available on the site does give the impression that I'm using something *way* old -- last time I checked, 1.3 < 1.4 < 1.5? -- and I couldn't see why. Also, there was mention that the bug was known, had been found and fixed in the past and the patch had gone missing -- I was wondering how a showstopper bug which had been found before wasn't in the current stable -- not to mention that the current stable is reported as 1.3.2 and Tomboy proudly presents "1.3.3" in my about box -- making me wonder again how I could have something obviously out of sync with releases.

I also obviously have no clue about things like a GNOME release date (that could have been mentioned instead of "available later today/tomorrow". I'm probably coming across as a bit of a nazi here, but I just figured from the POV of:
* the bug was originally known, fixed and the fix lost (and it's "only win32")
* I can see tags coming thick and fast, with no win32 binary release
* there's no update at http://projects.gnome.org/tomboy/download.html about a roadmap or something to give an outsider a clue
* I'm told that a new MSI will be available within the day to find that it's not (and the current MSI, from my POV, looked way outdated)
that win32 is quite a second-class citizen in the array of target platforms. I'm obviously wrong because at least one of the devs works on win32 so must wish for a win32 port that works. Apologies there

. For one, we're providing the msi at the same time as the tarball.
No, there's no 1.4.0 msi, no 1.3.4 msi, no 1.5.0 msi. You don't release msi's alongside tarballs. It's OK to not do that, but don't say you do if you don't ):
On the other hand we don't rely on
autoconf/autotools on Windows. Building the project on Windows uses
MSBuild, and is as easy as typing "msbuild Tomboy.sln" if you happen
to have the software around (or use SharpDevelop, MonoDevelop,
VisualStudio Express or whatever. Nothing *nixy about the process
though). Which we don't require, mind you.
Great, where is this .sln? Not in the source tarball? Certainly not in the 1.5.0 tarball. If there were, I would have just built it myself and shut up (mostly) about it. It still doesn't help the average user, but I could have provided a build for my friends, if they were interested. I suppose I could just drag all the .cs files into a project and try my luck, but I'm not expecting great results.

> I guess what I'm drilling on about in such length is that Tomboy is a great
> app with great x-platform usage. Pity that it's really only available for
> *nix users, since the win32 build is well outdated and buggy.

I guess this is the part that's really, really wrong. See above. 1.4.1
was tagged in git on the 4th of October, roughly 13 hours before you
wrote your mail.
So, in 13 hours, no-one could have just cranked out an msi to sit alongside the other binaries and make a very minor update to a static html page? I understand this is all not-for-profit, but, if I were a maintainer, I would have bothered. Especially if someone had made the comment that an msi would be available "available later today/tomorrow (depending on our time and your timezone)".  Just saying. And never mind the 1.3.3/1.3.4 releases. I assume they fix non-win32 issues? 

This was promised to be available very soon (yesterday or today) in
the original bug report,
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=624885, a mere 10 minutes
after the comment you quote above
And about 13 hours before the original mail, hence my confusion. If the msi can't be delivered, cool -- it's free and I appreciate all of the hard work that goes into it -- it's just one of the cards in the hand that makes it look like the team doesn't care much for the win32 release. All of these are small things which, when stacked together portray an image of apathy.
 
1) Your bug was reacted on in a matter of minutes. You reminded us of
a bug/patch that didn't make the "current" (i.e. the one that was
announced to the public on the Tomboy project site at the time of your
bug report) releases nor hit the git repository, thanks for that.
Don't thank me -- it's the responsible thing for a user to do. If I didn't report it, I'm a bad user. The reaction time was excellent -- again, another reason why it looked like actually making a binary release was very unimportant: the source is fixed and binary users are left out in the cold.

2) The timing was kind of special, because Tomboy follows the Gnome
release cycle and yesterday was supposed to be a release date. Refer
to [1] to see what is part of a release for us (and note the Windows
part).
Apologies for ranting at a critical time. I really didn't know. I know that release dates for large projects are hectic days. FYI, if I had known this, I would have just waited a couple more days with auto-sync turned off.

3) The maintainer said right away that he supports doing a 1.4.1 point
release for Windows only, again mere minutes after your report and
just for that fix.
Cool -- where is it? It's still not anywhere on the tomboy site or on ftp.gnome.org. You'll have to excuse me here -- again, this (without the other history about the release day) looks like it's just going to slip by. Also, I didn't know about your release checklist (and how the win32 build is *way* down the list), so I would have expected something along the lines of:
1) code, fix, commit, tag
2) make snapshot tarball, upload
3) make msi, upload
4) update website to reflect updates
5) send announcement mails

In particular, I don't see how "update the home page" and "update the download page" come in higher than the win32 build -- if you update the web page first, surely you run for the inevitable: Sally comes to http://live.gnome.org/Tomboy looking for the most fantastic notes application, gets a win32 link which doesn't lead anywhere and is a sad, sad panda. But I'm not here to tell you how to do things -- just that I'm sure you could see how the way you do do things might be a little, well, confusing for me (:

I can hardly see a way to react faster/better (ignoring the fact that
the bug could and arguably should have been fixed already).
The only thing I would have liked would have been an msi upload to ftp.gnome.org. Even if the homepage doesn't reflect it yet, subscribers to a bug like this would appreciate a ping-back with a link. I would have been *more* than ecstatic with exactly that.

... we (me included) still try to
improve it actively (both the "contribute on Windows" situation and
the general Windows specific(!) "end user" experience).
And I thank you for it. There is a plethora of great software I can get on my Ubuntu box that I just can't get under windows -- or can't easily get. Every team which makes the effort to cross-port earns a very warm, fuzzy place in my heart, not in the least because I know it's not a trivial task, even when you're using an "OS-agnostic" platform, because you want to take advantage of the shiney bits on your targets too.
 
You have an open source project that originated on Linux and supports
two build systems, one for Linux, one for trivially easy Windows
builds (not for the end user, obviously). That even supports your
Windows 7 jump lists (not my work, but I'm highly addicted to that
feature) and comes with a usable, standard MSI (not some self
extracting zip or 3rd party installer software) for quite a long time.
I didn't know about the jump lists. To whomever implemented that, kudos.

The msi that should make the 1.4 announcement can currently be found
at [2]. I cannot upload to that gnome ftp so you're free to either
wait for Sandy/Paul to grab the file and in the right place (probably
_after_ doing the release chore in [2]) or you take it from my link
right now.

Ben

1: http://live.gnome.org/Tomboy/ReleaseChecklist
2: http://ben.sh/Tomboy-1.4.1.msi
 
Thanks, I will most certainly use your link! Sorry if I sound like an ingrate -- just cranky when my notes keep on crashing ):


--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
The competent programmer is fully aware of the limited size of his own skull. He therefore approaches his task with full humility, and avoids clever tricks like the plague.
- Djikstra.
_______________________________________________
Tomboy-list mailing list
Tomboy-list@...
http://lists.beatniksoftware.com/listinfo.cgi/tomboy-list-beatniksoftware.com
Sandy Armstrong | 5 Oct 14:30 2010
Picon

Re: I'm a little confused...

Wow, this whole thread is really boring.

1. We do not use Mono because it makes cross-platform development
easier.  We use it for productivity.  Cross-platform stuff is just a
nice bonus.

2. I had a baby and started a new job, and have had trouble keeping
the website up-to-date and doing a few other release duties this past
cycle.  I expect things to improve for the new cycle.  Sorry for this,
but that's life.

3. We follow the GNOME release cycle.  1.[odd number].x releases are
development releases, and 1.[even number].x are stable releases.  You
could have stuck with 1.2.x until 1.4.x MSIs appeared.  The libproxy
stuff was new in the 1.3.x *development* releases.  The Tomboy website
is pretty clear about the distinction.

4. 1.4.0 is technically released...I uploaded the tarball on schedule
with GNOME 2.32.0.  However, I have not announced it yet, because I
have not had time to create mac/win binaries yet.  When we announce,
it will include a 1.4.1 MSI.

5. I haven't read your whole email because this is pretty boring and
only takes away time I could be using to prep a 1.4.0 ANNOUNCE mail,
make a Mac binary, and make the whole point moot.

Sandy
Davyd McColl | 5 Oct 14:51 2010
Picon

Re: I'm a little confused...

On 5 October 2010 14:30, Sandy Armstrong <sanfordarmstrong-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
Wow, this whole thread is really boring.
I apologise profusely that the comments and frustrations of one of your users should bore you. The comments and frustrations of the users of *my products* are incredibly important to me. I'm really sorry that I expected that you, like me, should care. Trust me, I won't make the mistake again.

2. I had a baby and started a new job, and have had trouble keeping
the website up-to-date and doing a few other release duties this past
cycle.  I expect things to improve for the new cycle.  Sorry for this,
but that's life.
Yes, that is completely life. I too have a little one on the way. Those events (new family member, new job) are far from trivial. My expectations were based solely on the feedback on the bug listing. If you want to tell anyone that they should know better, perhaps point at the people there who made me think that a binary release was imminent. Or take it out on me. Whatever works for you.

3. We follow the GNOME release cycle.  1.[odd number].x releases are
development releases, and 1.[even number].x are stable releases.  You
could have stuck with 1.2.x until 1.4.x MSIs appeared.  The libproxy
stuff was new in the 1.3.x *development* releases.  The Tomboy website
is pretty clear about the distinction.
By that rationale, there should be a 1.4.0 MSI release, no? A source snapshot exists. It's an even release.
 
4. 1.4.0 is technically released...I uploaded the tarball on schedule
with GNOME 2.32.0.  However, I have not announced it yet, because I
have not had time to create mac/win binaries yet.
Again, I must apologise for bothering to trawl the gnome ftp site, trying to find a solution to my problem in a newer release instead of just giving up on the project altogether or bothering the devs at the outset. Used to be that when a user did that, the devs were happy that the user was making an effort. And since the 1.4.0 branch is "technically released", I must have been absolutely bonkers to expect that it would have binaries available.

5. I haven't read your whole email because this is pretty boring
Once again, so sorry to have cause you boredom. I truly hope to be more entertaining in the future. Say, would you like fries with that? You're not the only person with a life, just by the way. Treating other people with disregard because you're under pressure only paints you in a negative light. Not reading my mail because you don't have time is quite OK -- I'm not some super-important person, not by a long shot. Not reading it because you think you're so much more interesting -- well, that's just a matter of (rather flaky) opinion.


--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
The competent programmer is fully aware of the limited size of his own skull. He therefore approaches his task with full humility, and avoids clever tricks like the plague.
- Djikstra.
_______________________________________________
Tomboy-list mailing list
Tomboy-list@...
http://lists.beatniksoftware.com/listinfo.cgi/tomboy-list-beatniksoftware.com
Benjamin Podszun | 5 Oct 14:52 2010
Picon

Re: I'm a little confused...

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Davyd McColl <davydm@...> wrote:
> On 5 October 2010 11:07, Benjamin Podszun <benjamin.podszun@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> This is where your research failed you.
>
> Sorry, I was then badly misled by the wording in the bug reports to have
> understood that the source tarballs that I found under
> http://ftp.acc.umu.se/pub/GNOME/sources/tomboy/ (every release > 1.3.2) were
> actually of release quality.

They are. Just not announced (yet), which probably has lots of work
related and personal reasons.
So yes, they are "valid" source tarballs of course. But the "process"
for that was still pending, incomplete.

> Most especially, talk of streamlining code into
> a 1.5 release when the 1.3 is available on the site does give the impression
> that I'm using something *way* old -- last time I checked, 1.3 < 1.4 < 1.5?

Like a lot of software we're using an even minor number to denote a
stable version, an odd one for development versions. Releasing a
stable version leads more or less directly to
- 1.4 The stable release
- 1.5 (not as tag, but as version in the sources) The "future"

> * the bug was originally known, fixed and the fix lost (and it's "only
> win32")

This is nonsense. The bug was reported with a patch attached. We
didn't commit it (due to lack of time and maybe you can blame us for
forgetting it), ever.
The commit "only win32" is starting to tick me off. I wrote "This only
affects Windows anyway" in response of your comment "Please also make
sure there's a win32 build of this -- tomboy is only useful to me when
it's x-platform (home: ubuntu; work: win7).". The intended message is
"Well, sure. This bug is Windows only and is Windows relevant only and
therefor definitely only affects a Windows build". Let's assume that
the misunderstanding again was my fault.

> * I can see tags coming thick and fast, with no win32 binary release

Thick and fast meaning 1.4.1 and 1.5.0? The release yesterday was
1.5.0 - 1.4.1 was tagged, built (and will be announced/uploaded to the
ftp asap) n direct response to your needs.

> * there's no update at http://projects.gnome.org/tomboy/download.html about
> a roadmap or something to give an outsider a clue

Right, that's not prominent on the end-user site. It's mentionend on
the developer wiki, but I won't link to that project site: It
explicitly states at the top that we follow the Gnome release cycle,
but otherwise is pretty outdated (and I don't want to create a new
issue here..).

> * I'm told that a new MSI will be available within the day to find that it's
> not (and the current MSI, from my POV, looked way outdated)

I offered in the bug report to provide it _right away_. Either you
wait (fair enough). In that case I don't understand the attitude here.
Or you accept the offer. In which case most of the discussion would be
- irrelevant.

>> . For one, we're providing the msi at the same time as the tarball.
>
> No, there's no 1.4.0 msi, no 1.3.4 msi, no 1.5.0 msi. You don't release
> msi's alongside tarballs. It's OK to not do that, but don't say you do if
> you don't ):

You can try to twist it as much as you want, but the fact is that a
complete release includes, among others, binary releases for all
platforms, an announcement mail and an update to the website.

>> On the other hand we don't rely on
>> autoconf/autotools on Windows. Building the project on Windows uses
>> MSBuild, and is as easy as typing "msbuild Tomboy.sln" if you happen
>> to have the software around (or use SharpDevelop, MonoDevelop,
>> VisualStudio Express or whatever. Nothing *nixy about the process
>> though). Which we don't require, mind you.
>
> Great, where is this .sln? Not in the source tarball? Certainly not in the
> 1.5.0 tarball. If there were, I would have just built it myself and shut up
> (mostly) about it. It still doesn't help the average user, but I could have
> provided a build for my friends, if they were interested. I suppose I could
> just drag all the .cs files into a project and try my luck, but I'm not
> expecting great results.

The source tarball is provided for Linux packagers. You could have
found this link though, by following some rather prominent links from
the site, looking for Getting Involved, the development wiki etc..:
http://live.gnome.org/Tomboy/Building/Windows

>> > I guess what I'm drilling on about in such length is that Tomboy is a
>> > great
>> > app with great x-platform usage. Pity that it's really only available
>> > for
>> > *nix users, since the win32 build is well outdated and buggy.
>>
>> I guess this is the part that's really, really wrong. See above. 1.4.1
>> was tagged in git on the 4th of October, roughly 13 hours before you
>> wrote your mail.
>
> So, in 13 hours, no-one could have just cranked out an msi to sit alongside
> the other binaries and make a very minor update to a static html page? I
> understand this is all not-for-profit, but, if I were a maintainer, I would
> have bothered. Especially if someone had made the comment that an msi would
> be available "available later today/tomorrow (depending on our time and your
> timezone)".  Just saying. And never mind the 1.3.3/1.3.4 releases. I assume
> they fix non-win32 issues?

If I offer an MSI with the comment you quote, that's my fault and my
responsibility. I'm not the maintainer though. You got the msi now,
we'll update the site as time permits. Why continue the rant?

I snip the rest. Basically the first mail was a pretty long "Why mono"
and "You don't care about Windows" introduction of yourself to the
mailing list (at least to me). The second one is "Whatever you say, I
still feel neglected and I'm disappointed". Fine - but where's the
value in that? If we wouldn't care, do you think this would encourage
us to act differently? If we already care, do you think rants like
that instill joy and motivation?

Let's close it here, I probably should've stopped after sandy
responded already, but some parts of the mail were quoting me so much
out of context that I felt the need to at least correct them once
more.
_______________________________________________
Tomboy-list mailing list
Tomboy-list@...
http://lists.beatniksoftware.com/listinfo.cgi/tomboy-list-beatniksoftware.com

Sandy Armstrong | 5 Oct 15:17 2010
Picon

Re: I'm a little confused...

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 5:51 AM, Davyd McColl <davydm@...> wrote:
> On 5 October 2010 14:30, Sandy Armstrong
<sanfordarmstrong@...> wrote:
>>
>> Wow, this whole thread is really boring.
>
> I apologise profusely that the comments and frustrations of one of your
> users should bore you. The comments and frustrations of the users of *my
> products* are incredibly important to me. I'm really sorry that I expected
> that you, like me, should care. Trust me, I won't make the mistake again.

Your bug comments were very helpful.

Your long ranty email with no pictures of funny cats in it is boring.

>> 2. I had a baby and started a new job, and have had trouble keeping
>> the website up-to-date and doing a few other release duties this past
>> cycle.  I expect things to improve for the new cycle.  Sorry for this,
>> but that's life.
>
> Yes, that is completely life. I too have a little one on the way.

Congrats!  It is a life-changing experience, and I hope everything
works out great for you. :-)

> Those
> events (new family member, new job) are far from trivial. My expectations
> were based solely on the feedback on the bug listing. If you want to tell
> anyone that they should know better, perhaps point at the people there who
> made me think that a binary release was imminent. Or take it out on me.
> Whatever works for you.

Dude, we applied the patch yesterday.  Benjamin has already
volunteered to make a binary for 1.4.1 *today*.  How is that not
imminent?

>> 3. We follow the GNOME release cycle.  1.[odd number].x releases are
>> development releases, and 1.[even number].x are stable releases.  You
>> could have stuck with 1.2.x until 1.4.x MSIs appeared.  The libproxy
>> stuff was new in the 1.3.x *development* releases.  The Tomboy website
>> is pretty clear about the distinction.
>
> By that rationale, there should be a 1.4.0 MSI release, no? A source
> snapshot exists. It's an even release.

Yes, but as I said, making timely mac and windows binaries has been a
large failing of mine this cycle.

>> 4. 1.4.0 is technically released...I uploaded the tarball on schedule
>> with GNOME 2.32.0.  However, I have not announced it yet, because I
>> have not had time to create mac/win binaries yet.
>
> Again, I must apologise for bothering to trawl the gnome ftp site, trying to
> find a solution to my problem in a newer release instead of just giving up
> on the project altogether or bothering the devs at the outset. Used to be
> that when a user did that, the devs were happy that the user was making an
> effort. And since the 1.4.0 branch is "technically released", I must have
> been absolutely bonkers to expect that it would have binaries available.

See, this is more boring stuff.  We already covered this.  Your
demeanor in bugzilla was very nice and prompted us to apply an
immediate fix.  Try using that one more often.

>> 5. I haven't read your whole email because this is pretty boring
>
> Once again, so sorry to have cause you boredom. I truly hope to be more
> entertaining in the future. Say, would you like fries with that? You're not
> the only person with a life, just by the way. Treating other people with
> disregard because you're under pressure only paints you in a negative light.
> Not reading my mail because you don't have time is quite OK -- I'm not some
> super-important person, not by a long shot. Not reading it because you think
> you're so much more interesting -- well, that's just a matter of (rather
> flaky) opinion.

Yawn.  I don't think I'm interesting.  I just don't have time for
silly drama anymore.

You obviously know enough about how open source works to do things
correctly.  You'll be happier if you keep doing that.

I think my email makes my attitude very clear.  I try to get fixes out
to users in need quickly, especially when they are helpfully
commenting in bug reports.  When somebody is upset that I'm not doing
a better job of it, I dismiss it because I am literally doing the best
I can right now.  If that best isn't good enough for you, I have a
whole list of things I could use help with that I'd be happy to share
with you.

Sandy
_______________________________________________
Tomboy-list mailing list
Tomboy-list@...
http://lists.beatniksoftware.com/listinfo.cgi/tomboy-list-beatniksoftware.com

Davyd McColl | 5 Oct 15:50 2010
Picon

Re: I'm a little confused...

Benjamin, you're right -- this has gotten completely out of hand. I apologise for anything that you or the rest of the team would have taken personally -- personal attacks were not at all the point of the original mail, though I get the feeling that you certainly did feel attacked. Again, apologies.

I also understand that the use of Mono is a particularly sensitive nerve for the Tomboy devs -- partly because of the people who (wrongly, imo) want to ditch Mono because of some apparent tie in to Microsoft, and partly because of projects like gNote; which, if you read the author's site, wasn't made in an effort to ditch Mono for Mono' sake, but rather because he couldn't afford the space on his smaller distro and he did want the coolness of Tomboy on there. That author has been (erroneously, imo) lumped together with general .NET/Mono haters. Personally, I don't see the point -- as I pointed out in my first mail "a tool for a task". If you use X and it works for you, then I don't care. Here I feel as Linus does: choose the best tool you can

Your original offer to build an MSI seemed a little half-hearted -- I understand: you too have a life and a release was to be made shortly. I was quite content to wait for the release simply because you said it would be there within a day. I don't want to create unnecessary work for you or anyone else on the Tomboy team. I certainly don't think that I'm important enough to warrant doing a build just for me, most especially when a release is just around the corner. Turns out you guys basically have done so anyway :|

I understand (now) that the Tomboy team does care about win32 -- but I'm a little saddened that you couldn't possibly understand how I could have had the opposite view to start with. I guess here I'll chalk it up to miscommunication as you have. Let's let this whole thing lie. Calling people boring, etc, does nothing to improve the project or user morale or quality.

As a note though (and I think that perhaps you guys don't realise this): Tomboy is *really* important to me. I use it to organise my work and personal thoughts and workflows. If it doesn't work, I have to rely on my own dodgy memory -- not a win, trust me. The original outcry is not because I think it would be great to pick on some people who have been generous enough to release free, useful software, but because I find that software really useful and it just seemed that I was not going to be able to use it.

As a second note: I'm sorry that my first (and probably only) thread on this list was of a negative nature. I normally like to join a list and "watch" for a while before even posting. I guess I was just getting ahead of myself.

Also, I have made the error of thinking that my Ubuntu install had 1.3.x on it -- when it very much doesn't. When I thought that, I didn't want to use the 1.2.x release because I was simply concerned about compatibility between versions.

Which makes me want to ask the following, if you wouldn't mind answering: should I care about compatibility between them when I'm synchronising notes? For that matter, should I care about later releases and compatibility issues? Or is the note format cast in stone? Again, I would like to avoid offloading extra rubbish on the Tomboy team and buglist if I hit a snag and it's just because I should have not used two different versions in conjunction with each other. As a matter of interest, I'm pretty sure I also tried downgrading to 1.2.2 and got random crash-outs too. Most likely I didn't properly uninstall and left something dodgy in place. I miss a good package manager on Windows ):


--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
The competent programmer is fully aware of the limited size of his own skull. He therefore approaches his task with full humility, and avoids clever tricks like the plague.
- Djikstra.

_______________________________________________
Tomboy-list mailing list
Tomboy-list@...
http://lists.beatniksoftware.com/listinfo.cgi/tomboy-list-beatniksoftware.com
Sandy Armstrong | 5 Oct 16:54 2010
Picon

Note and sync compatibility between Tomboy versions (was Re: I'm a little confused...)

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 6:50 AM, Davyd McColl <davydm@...> wrote:
> Which makes me want to ask the following, if you wouldn't mind answering:
> should I care about compatibility between them when I'm synchronising notes?
> For that matter, should I care about later releases and compatibility
> issues? Or is the note format cast in stone?

We have not changed the note format in years.

In terms of synchronisation, if you are using the Tomboy Web add-in to
sync to Tomboy Online, Ubuntu One, or your own personal Snowy server,
you should expect everything to Just Work for any combination of
versions since 1.0, although the sync experience is much improved in
later versions, especially 1.2.x

If you are simply copying note files around in some way, you should be
fine all the way back to 0.10 or something ridiculous.

We don't have a good plan for breaking compatibility in the future,
though.  It will require a lot of thought and some very good reasons
to proceed with any change that would break the compatibility of our
note data.

Sandy
Spacelee | 6 Oct 12:31 2010
Picon

I can't open tomboy on my mac os 10.6.3

the log when I start tomboy:

Oct  6 18:29:52 localhost [0x0-0x1a01a].org.gnome.tomboy[149]: /Users/zhenyu/Downloads/Tomboy 2.app/Contents/MacOS/Tomboy: line 13: exec: : not found
Oct  6 18:29:52 localhost com.apple.launchd.peruser.501[78] ([0x0-0x1a01a].org.gnome.tomboy[149]): Exited with exit code: 127


--
Space Lee

_______________________________________________
Tomboy-list mailing list
Tomboy-list@...
http://lists.beatniksoftware.com/listinfo.cgi/tomboy-list-beatniksoftware.com

Gmane