[openbox] [ANNOUNCE] Openbox (3.3-rc2) available in Fedora Extras
peter at thecodergeek.com
Thu Jun 29 22:35:23 EDT 2006
Neil Bird wrote:
> Around about 29/06/06 06:53, Peter Gordon typed ...
>> I wish to inform you that Openbox is now available from Fedora Extras
>> for Fedora Core 4, Core 5, and Development. This means that it will be
>> very straightforward for Fedora users to keep up-to-date with the latest
>> Openbox releases and patches.
> So on that note, is there any indication of what patches posted to
> this list and/or the ob buglist may get included?
> Naturally, I'm most interested in my own patch [allow access to dock
> (gnome panels) when cycling windows]. I currently roll my own FC5 ob
> RPM and include said patch; I'll have to watch out now for extras
> updates undoing my patch unless I can get it into rc3!
I'm currently talking to a few people (hi, omp!) about including
specific patches based on the following criteria (some of which are
admittedly rather subjective, I apologize):
* How intrusive it to the codebase? I.e., it is just a minor patch or
does it significantly alter much of the code?
Minor patches are likely to be simpler to maintain; and deviating from
too much from upstream is a Bad Thing(TM) generally.
* Is it likely that this will be added to the next upstream RC or release?
Barring any strange backporting issues, I will almost always be happy to
patch a release in Extras if it fixes a bug or something but is not yet
available in an official release (such as a security patch or major bug
fix found only in CVS or similar).
* Does the code maintain the same basic styling patterns and quality
as the rest of Openbox? Basically: Is it clean? Does the patch
implement the feature in a cleanly-designed way, or does it seem to be a
kludge of sorts?
Remember: Cleaner code is more maintainable code. :)
* Does the patch fix a security-related problem, major bugs (such as
mwemory leaks) or compilation error(s)?
These are severe things that should be fixed ASAP and so I will be
hesitant not to include them.
Please let me know of these such patches and I'll probably incorporate
them into the Extras packaging. If possible, I ask that you post such
enhancement requests to Red Hat's Bugzilla (product: "Fedora Extras,"
component "openbox"), as this will allow me to keep track of them more
Peter Gordon (codergeek42)
GnuPG Public Key ID: 0xFFC19479 / Fingerprint:
DD68 A414 56BD 6368 D957 9666 4268 CB7A FFC1 9479
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 251 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the openbox