GNOME 3.0 cleanup: Call to module developers

I was recently asked (Czech link) “On a scale from 0 to 10 for GNOME 3 as planned to be where would the development be now?” My answer was “From my limited point of view currently a 7: Lots of work done, lots of work still to do.” And I started wondering: How much work is left in the cleanup area?

Now that 2.30 is out module developers must spend some time now to get their module(s) ready for GNOME 3.0.

It might not be clear to everybody that there is quite some work left.
If you don’t start now it might be too late to properly fix issues (e.g. adding missing accessor functions in GTK+ for the uncommon usecase in your module).
I’ll list the known bug reports per module. (Obviously this is not a list of all outstanding GNOME 3.0 issues but only known cleanup tickets.)

Take a look at your module. Most of the open issues (like GSEAL or Deprecated GTK+ symbols) are trivial and will require less than an hour to fix. Just making your module compile with -DGSEAL_ENABLE for example will already help a lot. Or if you are a volunteer just contribute a patch for your favorite module.

Getting this done is a requirement to get the next major release out in time and in a good quality.

GNOME modules:

Some external dependencies (definitely not a complete list):

(Note that these lists obviously miss the conversion from gconf to GSettings/dconf and GTK+ single includes.
Data comes from the GSEAL wikipage, the overview stats and my brain. Hence it might be partially incorrect.)

3 Responses to “GNOME 3.0 cleanup: Call to module developers”

  1. xclaesse says:

    For empathy I made a branch that fixes everything[1]. I just have a GTK issue[2].

    [1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=612409
    [2] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=615660

  2. Bob says:

    Is there any *really* updated list of work to be done?
    Most of those links point to tickets already closed (or yet opened, but with working patches already committed), it is required more time to spot where the problems are than to correct them.

  3. aklapper says:

    @Bob: See the links at the bottom of my post.