Re: master branch is open again

2016-02-10 Thread Pavel Sanda
Uwe Stöhr wrote: > I don't agree. The tarball simply misses files. Adding them so that people > can use the tarball to compile the beta is in my opinion essential. This > does not change any code and thus it would still be beta 1. The proper way how to do this is to fix it and release beta2, no

Re: master branch is open again

2016-02-10 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 04:57:33PM -0800, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > If I misunderstood something and there is agreement that the beta1 tar > > ball should be changed, let me know. > > Once you put it on public ftp it will start to spread without our control, > so we shouldn't

Re: master branch is open again

2016-02-10 Thread Uwe Stöhr
Am 11.02.2016 um 01:48 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: Thanks for the fixes. I'm not planning on changing the beta1 tar ball because that would be changing the code so it wouldn't be beta1 anymore. I don't agree. The tarball simply misses files. Adding them so that people can use the tarball to comp

Re: master branch is open again

2016-02-10 Thread Pavel Sanda
Scott Kostyshak wrote: > If I misunderstood something and there is agreement that the beta1 tar > ball should be changed, let me know. Once you put it on public ftp it will start to spread without our control, so we shouldn't change the tarball. > It's good to know that the tar ball will be fixed

Re: master branch is open again

2016-02-10 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 01:36:00AM +0100, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Am 10.02.2016 um 04:00 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: > > >The beta1 tag and tar is complete. > > OK, I committed now some fixes and improvements for the installer. When you > fix the tarball, these could go in there if you like. Thanks for

Re: master branch is open again

2016-02-10 Thread Uwe Stöhr
Am 10.02.2016 um 04:00 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: The beta1 tag and tar is complete. OK, I committed now some fixes and improvements for the installer. When you fix the tarball, these could go in there if you like. regards Uwe

Re: master branch is open again

2015-11-17 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Le 17/11/2015 16:54, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : I see. Someday it would be nice to mark places in our code that make somewhat arbitrary decisions. The next step would be to implement some sort of mechanism that would produce a debug log (only enabled for devel mode) that would give information on

Re: master branch is open again

2015-11-17 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:04:13AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 17/11/2015 01:38, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > >>1 << 19 is a 1 with 19 zeros after it, in binary notation, so is equivalent > >>to 2^19 = 512K but much faster to calculate. This trick is used extensively > >>in debug.h. > >

Re: master branch is open again

2015-11-17 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Le 15/11/2015 18:05, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : Le 14/11/2015 05:13, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : I have tagged and tarred (and signed) alpha1. I will upload the tarballs soon. Development is open for post-alpha commits. So can we just commit as we see fit, or would you like stuff to go to m

Re: master branch is open again

2015-11-17 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Le 17/11/2015 01:38, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : 1 << 19 is a 1 with 19 zeros after it, in binary notation, so is equivalent to 2^19 = 512K but much faster to calculate. This trick is used extensively in debug.h. Thanks for this explanation, Richard. Now I understand. I'm still curious how 512K

Re: master branch is open again

2015-11-16 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 01:20:11PM -0500, Richard Heck wrote: > On 11/15/2015 05:27 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > >The following is not a critique (so please push because of Richard's > >positive feedback), but if you have time I am curious about the following: > > > >strwidth_cache_(1 << 19) >

Re: master branch is open again

2015-11-16 Thread Richard Heck
On 11/15/2015 05:27 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: The following is not a critique (so please push because of Richard's positive feedback), but if you have time I am curious about the following: strwidth_cache_(1 << 19) How did you decide on 19? And why the trick of 1 << 19 instead of just the f

Re: master branch is open again

2015-11-15 Thread Scott Kostyshak
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 12:18:28PM -0500, Richard Heck wrote: > On 11/15/2015 12:05 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > Le 14/11/2015 05:13, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : >> I have tagged and tarred > > (and signed) alpha1. I will upload the > tarballs >> soon. >> >> Development is open for post-alpha

Re: master branch is open again

2015-11-15 Thread Richard Heck
On 11/15/2015 12:05 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 14/11/2015 05:13, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : >> I have tagged and tarred > (and signed) alpha1. I will upload the tarballs >> soon. >> >> Development is open for post-alpha commits. > > So can we just commit as we see fit, or would you like s

Re: master branch is open again

2015-11-15 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
Le 14/11/2015 05:13, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : I have tagged and tarred (and signed) alpha1. I will upload the tarballs soon. Development is open for post-alpha commits. So can we just commit as we see fit, or would you like stuff to go to mailing list first? First example would be the follow