-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 562
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Next feature release #8615
Comments
Looking at the current PR queue the following things should/can go into the next feature release IMHO:
The other open PR I would like to postpone for now:
For #8611 it depends, see below. Also, I would like to finish my work on the "fast scroll" behavior. Guessing from the feedback it seems to work reasonably well now for the cache list, so I can start extracting it to a reusable feature to be applied to other lists in c:geo which have fastscroll enabled. One thing that we should discuss is how to proceed with "online maps onboarding":
We should decide whether we want to keep the implementation of #8183 or not:
My proposal would be:
This would remove the ability to open locally stored .map files, but would offer c:geo much less frequently when tapping on local files, avoiding the effects described in #8467. @Lineflyer |
Thanks @moving-bits for the good summary. Regarding the maps onboarding feature: For the list of PRs above I agree for most, only regarding #8589 I am a bit undecided as I did not yet understand if this is just a bugfix or also giving up some existing parsings. |
Ok, let's do it that way. I merged #8612 and prepared two new PR:
PR #8611 is postponed for now, as it's needed only for the new "map downloader" currently (and might be used for #8603 as well). As soon as we have branched I can merge the new "map downloader" to master so that you have a chance to test it. Then we can still decide whether to integrate it into the upcoming release or into a later release. |
Sound like a good plan! :) |
@Lineflyer: Anything that needs to be done for the next release regarding #8517? |
@Lineflyer: How about #8477 (comment)? |
IMHO the #8477 comment was solved or not. I will test a fresh installation and compare, because now I already played around with the settings. |
I will doublechek as time permits. Just merged the german translations and look over it next days. Lets keep the nightlies/master stable next days to see if its working smooth. Then we take action. |
I have not changed the way "history track line" gets drawn yet - it's still a "broad" line (standard: grey) with a smaller white line on top. As this is the only line drawn in this way this might be a reason to change it to the way all other lines are drawn - just as a plain line. OTOH this would give a different visual effect. |
Thanks.
Yes. I have merged the "fastscroll" and "disable file manager" PR already, so other than the two issues mentioned above (#8517 / #8477 (comment)) there's currently nothing new planned for master branch from my side. (BTW: #8477 itself is resolved, just the linked comment is TBD.) |
@moving-bits Do you have an overview whether there are any regression issues in our lists (meaning regressions compared to current release)? I will also do a scan of our issues next days. |
Oh yes: #8457 |
This should not happen for now on devices running up to Android 10, as I'd enabled the official mitigation for it ( But it will not work on the upcoming Android 11 devices, as Android enforces the new rules then. For that we'll have to rewrite our storage framework. |
I missed that, so I will give it another test run. |
Seems we look rather good now on our way to a new beta version. Based on my personal timing I would suggest two different options to decide upon:
I would prefer option 2, the only downside is, that I might probably unable to help and answer support mail if there is any serious problem on beta. But as I do not expect that, I would still prefer the faster approach. |
Both options would be fine for me, so go ahead with option 2 if you like. Can you give me a short feedback on #8477 (comment)? That's about if we want to change history track line to a regular non-shadowed line like all the other lines are. IMHO now would be a good timing for that with all that formatting changes for the map lines. If ok from your side I would prepare this as small PR for upcoming feature release. - Except if you say better not to change the shadowing. |
#8597 is merged meanwhile. I'm unsure about #8646:
No idea for #8632 yet, but for a beta we may continue for now. #8647 should be included - avoids painting OSM history track line in a "dotted style". |
I left yesterday for vacation. Just tell me, when you think everything is in. |
Without further information I cannot reproduce #8632 nor #8646, so I'm a bit lost. Are those two affecting other people as well, anything on support? Shall I implement mitigations (null checks avoiding the NPE)? Other than that nothing urgent left on my radar currently (but I may have missed something), so IMHO branches could be merged any time now. |
Ok, will do it and publish beta either after vacation or if I find time and technical possibility before. Will report back here. |
I will try to look on it this weekend when back from vacation. |
I have to test the reverts for #7998. I hope that it is finished tomorrow. |
OK, so lets wait for: |
I'm receiving an NPE in Routesort view when loading has not yet finished. Will create issue + PR for that. |
@Lineflyer |
Perfect. thanks.
OK, I will merge branches now. |
Be aware: Branches have been merged We do now have: I will try to build, test and publish beta tonight or tomorrow. |
@moving-bits |
Thanks, @Lineflyer, for merging the branches and starting to prepare beta and legacy versions. |
I'll look into it. |
Does work here for both master and legacy branch. (Tested with emulator, API 29) |
Release branch is the problem. |
Ok, I think I've found the culprit: The |
Did you already do that? |
Yes, had changed this yesterday on release branch. |
OK, I uploaded a new multiple APK beta version: It consists of our normal RC from I will update versions on status.cgeo.org in a few minutes so that we can see user counts. |
I just triggered some proofreadings on crowdin to get more translations in. |
DONE! |
@Lineflyer |
Well, for sure this problem should be solved. |
I guess the CI failure is somehow related to your PR as it runs smoothly for other PRs. |
Ready to go:
|
Let's close this, since this old release is finished and we are currently preparing a new one... |
Let's open this issue to discuss which things should go into the next feature release, and which should stay in the queue for now.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: