[Stk] New release and maintenance

[Ariel Elkin]

Hi Gary,

Then it looks like there might be a discrepancy in the STK's distribution
channels...

On the CCRMA website, the current release is 4.5.1 and dates from February
2016
https://ccrma.stanford.edu/software/stk/download.html

On GitHub, the current release is 4.5.2 and is actually two years old:
https://github.com/thestk/stk/releases

Messy. We're forking ourselves. Must be be tidied up.

Can we agree that there can only be one and only one canonical version of
the STK? User should always legitimately assume that all distribution
channels serve exactly the same copy of the software.

The first thing we should do is figure out the differences between the
codebase on the CCRMA website and the codebase on GitHub:

Download both:
https://github.com/thestk/stk/archive/master.zip
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/software/stk/release/stk-4.5.1.tar.gz

Unzip them, then run:
$opendiff ~/Downloads/stk-master ~/Downloads/stk-4.5.1

you'll notice that the delta is slight to the extent, I believe, that it
would be justified to discard the CCRMA version:
* .gitignore added to GitHub version
* CCRMA version spells "CoreMIDI" as "CoreMidi" in configure.ac,
src/RtMidi.cpp, and in doc/doxygen (CoreMIDI should be preferred as
acronyms are capitalised)
* CCRMA version adds doc/html (redundant as they're available online)
* CCRMA version adds projects/examples/libMakefile (redundant as GitHub
also has it as libMakefile.in in same directory)

Clearly, 4.5.1 on CCRMA has been superseded by 4.5.2 on GitHub.

Moving forwards:

* I believe that the code on the CCRMA website should mirror the one on
GitHub, because all the development, issue-tracking, and pull-requests is
done on GitHub. The code is developed on GitHub, it should originate from
GitHub, the CCRMA website can then mirror it (or just link to it). I think
we can discard the CCRMA version, and have the download page (
https://ccrma.stanford.edu/software/stk/download.html) simply link to the
GitHub repo (the changelog is useful and can be transferred to a CHANGELOG
file we'd add to the repo)

* Given that 55 commits have accumulated since GitHub's 4.5.1 release two
years ago, we should make a new release on GitHub. (On a general note,
every version number change should be a release, but making a release
actually only involves pushing a tag to the repository, GitHub
automatically creates the release for us).

Also, I'd be happy to manage new releases and can push 4.6.0 now with the
55 commits that have accumulated :-)

Thoughts?

Regarding issues, many are indeed stagnant, I'll ping the owners so that we
can move forwards with them or close them.

Ariel


On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Gary Scavone <gary at ccrma.stanford.edu>
wrote:

> Hi Ariel,
>
> Thanks for the offer to help.  The current release is only about 6 months
> old, which is fairly “new” from my perspective.  And unless I’m missing
> something, there has only been one merged pull request since then.  The two
> pending pull requests have been replied to but I didn’t get subsequent
> feedback from the contributors.  My feeling is that #58 is not a bug but
> rather based on the contributor using the class in an incorrect way.
>
> There are several “issues", but I don’t know when I would be able to
> address them.  In general, if someone wants something fixed, they should
> fix it themselves and then submit a pull request.
>
> There have been a number of updates to the RtMidi and RtAudio classes, but
> again, I’m not sure they are significant enough to substantiate a new
> release.
>
> Regards,
>
> —gary
>
> On Aug 3, 2016, at 8:36 AM, Ariel Elkin <arielelkin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Several bug fixes and improvements have been accumulating since v4.5.2,
> it'd be good to draft a new release.
>
> Also, two pull requests need to be reviewed:
> https://github.com/thestk/stk/pulls
>
> And issues have also been accumulating:
> https://github.com/thestk/stk/issues
>
> As far as I'm concerned, I can (as always) provide all the support needed
> for iOS, but I don't have (at this stage) the required background knowledge
> for maintaining an STK project on OS X, nor a Linux or Windows machine for
> development.
>
> So I think it would be good if we clarify who is responsible for dealing
> with new issues, pull requests, and overall maintenance. This would make
> maintenance and development more efficient in the long term.
>
> Ariel
> _______________________________________________
> Stk mailing list
> Stk at ccrma.stanford.edu
> https://cm-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/stk
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://cm-mail.stanford.edu/pipermail/stk/attachments/20160808/7d329ec8/attachment.html>