Version 26

[samdroid-apps]

Hi @hedayaty,

On extensions.gnome.org, you applied your patch to move to version 26: https://extensions.gnome.org/review/6097

However, this github repo is still on the version 25. Are you planning on updating the github repo, or is there a new place for the source?

Thanks,
Sam

[audreytoskin]

Bump. Can we get any input here, @hedayaty ? We'd like to package your handy extension for the Fedora repos.

[martinkg]

i attached this patch here again
gnome-version.patch.txt

--- metadata.json.orig	2016-09-24 20:55:00.271703580 +0200
+++ metadata.json	2016-09-24 20:55:48.718786144 +0200
@@ -3,8 +3,8 @@
   "description": "Displays Internet Speed",
   "name": "NetSpeed",
   "original-author": "hedayaty@gmail.com",
-  "shell-version": [ "3.10" , "3.12", "3.14", "3.16", "3.18" ],
+  "shell-version": [ "3.10", "3.12", "3.14", "3.16", "3.18", "3.20", "3.22" ],
   "url": "https://github.com/hedayaty/NetSpeed",
   "uuid": "netspeed@hedayaty.gmail.com",
-  "version": 25
+  "version": 26
 }
--- stylesheet.css.orig	2016-09-24 20:56:05.080804000 +0200
+++ stylesheet.css	2016-09-24 20:57:35.849912322 +0200
@@ -1,11 +1,12 @@
 /* Example stylesheet */
 .ns-label {
 	text-align: right;
+	padding-top : 3px;
 }
 
 .ns-unit-label {
 	font-size: 65%;
-	padding: 5px 2px 0px 0px;
+	padding-top : 8px;
 }
 
 .ns-menuitem {

[audreytoskin]

Or maybe this thread should be a more general question of what the intended version numbering scheme is supposed to be, and what the current version release is.

The biggest source of confusion on this point may be the CHANGELOG, which shows the latest version number as 3.16. I have a feeling that that's intended to be the compatible GNOME Shell version? But that would not be how CHANGELOGs are normally formatted, and it contradicts the version number in metadata.json.

[hedayaty]

Sorry, I see a surge of comment on issues, I am on vocation for a little bit longer.
Just something short, the versions are not meant to match the versions of gnome.
They just reflect my changes. Unfortunately, there might be gaps between github and extensions :(

[hedayaty]

Sorry, I am back with the new version of Fedora.
Looking around for what I have been doing with the extension.

[hedayaty]

I do not know how I have lost those changes on the repo! Maybe I was using a different computer and did not push the changes to github. Ironically, half the changes are already in my repo

Anyway, thanks for sending the patch.

[hedayaty]

@terrycloth Adding to Fedora seems like a nice idea. I originally was half way there. When, gnome extension site started I held the Fedora one.

I might be still listed as a package maintainer for Fedora. I you can help me, I would be glad to add this to Fedora

[martinkg]

@ hedayaty I am also a package maintainer for Fedora and i have already created a new package request on bugzillla.

[audreytoskin]

I just noticed that commit 0b769d5 from a couple days ago bumped the version number to 27. To be clear, does that commit mark the version 27 release, or is there going to be a git tag coming up? Thanks.

[audreytoskin]

Sorry, but one more time: @hedayaty Are you planning on doing a git tag on the version 27 release, or is commit 0b769d5 the commit we should use to build our Fedora package?

[hedayaty]

So sorry, about my late follow ups.

• Now both gnome and github must be in sync.
• The locale patches are applied + few minor fixes to po files.

[hedayaty]

Anything else we need to do?
I do not mind adding the spec file to repo (not sure with commit-id)

I saw the last comment There are a couple important issues still open upstream?
So was he referring to github being out of sync?

[hedayaty]

BTW, thanks @terrycloth @martinkg for following up and help