This is a version bump request. And there is nothing to do but copy 0.7.4 ebuild to 0.7.5 (proxy maintainer here.)
Can confirm that a simple version bump works. Would be nice to see it in portage. 0.7.5 is much more useful than its predecessor. It allows you to select an ssid without re-entry the key.
Right... I am all in favor to bump to this version. Now, somebody--a proxy maintainer dev senior--should commit in the official tree. -- I have no rights for that kind of things. So, re-bump in the proxy-maint ML.
$ USE="gtk -gtk3 -qt4" ebuild dhcpcd-ui-0.7.5.ebuild clean instal sees it build ok but at install; * QA Notice: This package installs one or more .desktop files that do not * pass validation. * * /usr/share/applications/dhcpcd-gtk.desktop: error: value "GNOME;LXDE;MATE;XFCE;ROX;Cinnamon;" for key "OnlyShowIn" in group "Desktop Entry" contains an unregistered value "Cinnamon"; values extending the format should start with "X-" * Also note qt4? ( dev-qt/qtgui:4 ) What about addressing qt5 which has been out for a while now
@Ian: First part is old story, upstream won't do anything by a false postive QA. Second, I've not heard anything about a qt5 applet yet... only a planed EFL one--which is only planed, nothing done so far because upstream is busy with other dhcpcd (daemon) instead.
(In reply to tokiclover from comment #4) > @Ian: First part is old story, upstream won't do anything by a false postive > QA. Second, I've not heard anything about a qt5 applet yet... only a planed > EFL one--which is only planed, nothing done so far because upstream is busy > with other dhcpcd (daemon) instead. Well, old story i take it you mean it's been that way for a long time. Doesn't excuse ignoring it. To leave it is to snub the intent to pass qa protocols / requirements. It is a simple task to 'fix' this. I have done similar a number of times. MAKE the value start with "X-". It can be a one line sed stmnt. The qt5 you have explained as not ready and available. Then I shall commit the bump
(In reply to Ian Delaney from comment #5) > (In reply to tokiclover from comment #4) > > @Ian: First part is old story, upstream won't do anything by a false postive > > QA. Second, I've not heard anything about a qt5 applet yet... only a planed > > EFL one--which is only planed, nothing done so far because upstream is busy > > with other dhcpcd (daemon) instead. > > Well, old story i take it you mean it's been that way for a long time. > Doesn't excuse ignoring it. To leave it is to snub the intent to pass qa > protocols / requirements. It is a simple task to 'fix' this. I have done > similar a number of times. You are so right! Here is the latest allowed list: http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apb.html I'll post the content here also: OnlyShowIn Value Environment GNOME GNOME Desktop KDE KDE Desktop LXDE LXDE Desktop MATE MATÉ Desktop Razor Razor-qt Desktop ROX ROX Desktop TDE Trinity Desktop Unity Unity Shell XFCE XFCE Desktop EDE EDE Desktop Cinnamon Cinnamon Desktop Old Legacy menu systems As you can see, Cinnamon is clearly listed and thus the package is correct. If it so happens you are right, please get the FreeDesktop upstream to update their published standards. Otherwise, please fix the bogus QA check in Gentoo.
tokiclover mentioned upstream won't do anything by a false postive QA which rings true. Upstream are often dismissive of trivial impurities. Because you asked nicely, *dhcpcd-ui-0.7.5 (31 Jul 2015) 31 Jul 2015; Ian Delaney <idella4@gentoo.org> +dhcpcd-ui-0.7.5.ebuild, -dhcpcd-ui-0.6.0.ebuild: bump; tidy syntax, correction of qa issue to the .desktop file, closes bug #535962, rm old
(In reply to Ian Delaney from comment #7) > Upstream are often dismissive of trivial impurities. This particular upstream is dismissive of holier than thou ass hattery without any substance. Would it really hurt to say something like this? "The FreeDesktop specification is wrong, the correct entry is X-Cinnamon." Then explain why this is so, or point to a relevant URL. But no, you had to be a complete and utter asshole about it. So, I'm going to ask nicely just one more time. Can you please point to a URL which describes what the correct entry should be?
Here is the GNOME developer guide, again showing Cinnamon and not X-Cinnamon https://developer.gnome.org/menu-spec/#onlyshowin-registry
Well R. Marples you just check mated yourself. It would appear your remark "You are so right!" was in fact one of sarchasm, and I took it at face value. I decided it was best to edit the qa line out, though it seems the suggested correction is in fact erroneous. tokicolver has already said "upstream won't do anything". You never said the correction is in fact erroneous, instead you said 'You are so right!' Think about it. The intent of 'you asked nicely' was intended face value, then you take it as a sardonic retort, then you foolishly escalate with a personal attack on a dev in the bug. YOU set this up. The retort is uncalled for in anyone's book. In a situation of this type, one carefully tests and clarifies to eliminate misunderstanding and avoid the exact state that has resulted here. The qa issue afaiac is secondary. The issue is whether your retort of poor judgement warrants putting before comrel for violation of CoC. You might be in the right re the entry of Cinnamon, but it pales into insignificance next to the wrong of abusing a contributor in the process of working a bug. Asking nicely just one more time. ? Far too late. It is the proxy maintainer to whom I will in future respond and negotiate and change to the ebuild.
(In reply to Ian Delaney from comment #10) > The qa issue afaiac is secondary. No, the QA issue is in-fact paramount. It demonstrates yet again that Gentoo QA just makes big hand waving statements saying "this goes against QA", providing a "fix" without describing what the fix is and starting off with the accusation of snubbing the intent to pass QA protocols (if you didn't notice, I *am* the upstream). This also isn't the first case of this exact issue with and older ebuild either. I can't be arsed to look up the ticket, but you'll find another Gentoo QA dev saying I'm wrong as well, point blank ignoring FreeDesktop and GNOME documentation about the .desktop allowed entries. I don't see you doing anything about them or the Gentoo QA check either. One of the two is clearly wrong (Gentoo QA check, or upstream documentation). I don't really care which is right or wrong just as long as they both eventually agree and I can make my change upstream once an agreement is reached. I am willing to bet beer money that nothing changes in regards to this issue and some other poor developer will suffer the wrath of the mighty Gentoo QA.
