Bug 324227 – Stabilise www-client/midori-0.2.6

• Status: RESOLVED FIXED
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description Nick White 2010-06-16 08:14:47 UTC]

Midori has been performing well for me for a while now (on x86). The latest version has been in the tree since 24th May (about 20 days), with no bugs reported against it, and it doesn't depend on anything non-stable. Seems like a good candidate for stabilisation.

[Comment 1 Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) 2010-06-21 15:50:04 UTC]

I was unofficially waiting for some non 0.x release :)

Let's improve the ewarn message about "crashes" and then request amd64/x86. At least, change it to elog.

[Comment 2 Vladimir 2010-06-21 19:55:13 UTC]

Hello!
Sure there are bugs (and related bugreports) about Midori! :)
One may just visit the http://www.twotoasts.de/bugs/ page and see them.

For example, here is a bugreport about version 0.2.6:
http://www.twotoasts.de/bugs/index.php?do=details&task_id=860&project=2&order=lastedit&sort=desc

And I can confirm this bug. Midori's behaviour in this case is the same on my amd64 machine.
So, I'm not sure if it is good enough to stabilize it with such amount of bugs aboard. But of course it tends to become noticeably more stable. 

[Comment 3 Nick White 2010-06-25 21:00:17 UTC]

(In reply to comment #2)
> Sure there are bugs (and related bugreports) about Midori! :)
> One may just visit the http://www.twotoasts.de/bugs/ page and see them.

Yes, of course there are bugs, I should have been clearer. I meant that there are no major outstanding bugs (and none have been reported to the gentoo bugtracker), so this seems stable enough to be marked such. The working of the criteria for stable in the devmanual is "widely tested, known to work and not have any serious issues" which I think fits the current version of midori well. I have found it to be very much more stable than the the latest stable version of firefox.

[Comment 4 Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) 2010-06-28 19:01:27 UTC]

I'll generally agree with the last comment. Adding amd64 & x86

[Comment 5 Nick White 2010-06-29 17:20:47 UTC]

I'm not sure this should depend on bug 326055, as it looks like it affects any webkit browser. But I'll leave that decision up to someone else :-)

[Comment 6 Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) 2010-06-29 17:44:26 UTC]

(In reply to comment #5)
> I'm not sure this should depend on bug 326055, as it looks like it affects any
> webkit browser. But I'll leave that decision up to someone else :-)
> 

Well, we don't want to push midori to the stable tree if the stable version of gnutls is faulty =/ I don't have a solution but I don't want to make things worse. So we will wait for a gnutls fix, or something. Removing arches.

[Comment 7 Jeremy Olexa (darkside) (RETIRED) 2010-07-31 03:11:01 UTC]

turned out to be a libsoup issue. A fixed version is stable on x86 & amd64, let's move forward (again)

[Comment 8 David Abbott (RETIRED) 2010-07-31 18:32:55 UTC]

All good x86.

[Comment 9 Markos Chandras (RETIRED) 2010-07-31 23:34:24 UTC]

amd64 done

[Comment 10 Vladimir 2010-08-01 09:39:56 UTC]

  Hello everyone!
  Do you know about this issue with Midori-0.2.6
http://www.twotoasts.de/bugs/index.php?do=details&task_id=860

  I'm not sure whether this is related to stabilizing Midori-0.2.6, but just in case... :)

[Comment 11 Christian Faulhammer (RETIRED) 2010-08-01 11:59:04 UTC]

(In reply to comment #10)
>   Hello everyone!
>   Do you know about this issue with Midori-0.2.6
> http://www.twotoasts.de/bugs/index.php?do=details&task_id=860
> 
>   I'm not sure whether this is related to stabilizing Midori-0.2.6, but just in
> case... :)


 Thanks for the feedback, I think we can stabilise nonetheless.

[Comment 12 Christian Faulhammer (RETIRED) 2010-08-01 13:56:35 UTC]

stable x86, thanks David, closing