Still 17 pending open pull requests

[Antonio Linares]

who is in charge to review them ?

Users want to help and we ignore them ?

thanks

[Charly Nou mil]

Dear Antonio, 

You are right.  This seems very forgotten and perhaps a change would be needed at the organizational level.  The worst thing is the feeling of oblivion....

Regards

C.

[Enrico Maria Giordano]

+1

--
Enrico Maria Giordano

http://www.emagsoftware.it
http://www.emagsoftware.it/emgmusic
http://www.emagsoftware.it/spectrum
http://www.emagsoftware.it/tbosg

[Aleksander Czajczynski]

Hello Antonio

What's preventing you from reviewing them?
For most of them a related ChangeLog.txt entry should be written.

Those who show up from time to time to voluntarily process some of the
pull requests
rather say that ChangeLog.txt entries are not compatible with git/GitHub
workflow, complicating
the process of pulling small patches especially. On the other hand if
the pull request includes ChangeLog entry,
then every next one will not be mergable -> after something else is
commited or merged.

Viktor and Phil Krylov rather agreed that commiting to ChangeLog.txt
should be dropped. Przemek did not tell anything.

I would agree to that too, but if you say that users are willing to
help, more than to only drop random patches of their interest. Hey!
Proceed to do a 3.2 release - start with writing a Release Notes /
What's New document for many years, freeze, then make packages and
builds of "new stable release".

I'd propose to drop ChangeLog.txt commit requirement after 3.2 release
is made.

Best regards, Aleksander

[Bacco]

Aleksander nailed it on "if you say that users are willing tohelp, more than to only drop random patches of their interest" ...

People need to remember that they can fork Harbour instead of pushing things on main repo (real and well done fixes are welcome, obviously), also I think this list is becoming a problem lately, with random discussions that don't help development at all.

Regards,

Bacco

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Harbour Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to harbour-deve...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-devel/66BDF303.8020508%40fki.pl.

[Charly Nou mil]

Hello Alexander,

Thank you for your opinion like everyone else's as always and perhaps we can agree, but is it possible to know how many maintainers and reviewers of the different Pull Requests there are currently?  Maybe we should know who or how many collaborators help in this process.  I ask this with all due respect and try to find solutions together, of course.

C.

[Antonio Linares]

Dear Aleksander,

I understand your proposal, but honestly, I don't see why I should follow these steps, especially when I don't have write access to the repository. What's the point of me writing a Release Notes / What's New document if I can't commit changes to the repository? Wouldn't it be more practical for someone with write access to take care of this? Additionally, if the goal is to simplify the GitHub workflow, wouldn't it be better to simplify the contribution process instead of adding more steps?

best regards,

[Enrico Maria Giordano]

Il 16/08/2024 08:13, Antonio Linares ha scritto:

> I understand your proposal, but honestly, I don't see why I should
> follow these steps, especially when I don't have write access to the
> repository. What's the point of me writing a Release Notes / What's New
> document if I can't commit changes to the repository? Wouldn't it be
> more practical for someone with write access to take care of this?
> Additionally, if the goal is to simplify the GitHub workflow, wouldn't
> it be better to simplify the contribution process instead of adding more
> steps?

With all respect, I find quite disgraceful and unacceptable that the
father of Harbour doesn't have write access to the repository...

[oleksa]

Hi,

With all respect for all, the father of Harbour have write access to https://github.com/xHarbour-org/xharbour?

Regards,

Oleksii Myronenko

16 серпня 2024, 10:55:56, від "Enrico Maria Giordano" <e.m.gi...@emagsoftware.it>:

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Harbour Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to harbour-deve...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-devel/556262e8-c9ed-4733-b699-e2706c6d2a10%40emagsoftware.it.

[Enrico Maria Giordano]

Il 16/08/2024 10:06, oleksa ha scritto:

> Hi,
>
> With all respect for all, the father of Harbour have write access to
> https://github.com/xHarbour-org/xharbour?

I don't know (maybe he should have it). Anyway, if
https://github.com/harbour is the official Harbour repository, Antonio
should have the write access to it.

[Alex Strickland]

Hi

Maybe he never asked?

--

Regards

Alex

[Enrico Maria Giordano]

Il 16/08/2024 10:40, Alex Strickland ha scritto:

> Hi
>
> Maybe he never asked?

Ok, great. Please Antonio, ask for write access, if you want.

[oleksa]

Hmm, as i correctly understand the rules of git of any reposatory, if you don't created it and wanna have write access to repositories, you should ask to add one, aren't?

16 серпня 2024, 11:11:45, від "Enrico Maria Giordano" <e.m.gi...@emagsoftware.it>:

Il 16/08/2024 10:06, oleksa ha scritto:

> Hi,
> 
> With all respect for all, the father of Harbour have write access to 
> https://github.com/xHarbour-org/xharbour?

I don't know (maybe he should have it). Anyway, if 
https://github.com/harbour is the official Harbour repository, Antonio 
should have the write access to it.

Should...? Why?

Maybe the developers should have asked Antonio's permission to create a repository on github?

And, i don't remember him being involved in the discussion of moving the project to github.

Regards,

Oleksii Myronenko

-- 
Enrico Maria Giordano

http://www.emagsoftware.ithttp://www.emagsoftware.it/emgmusichttp://www.emagsoftware.it/spectrumhttp://www.emagsoftware.it/tbosg

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Harbour Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to harbour-deve...@googlegroups.com

.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-devel/8781f5d3-bbe0-4d15-9de7-203f232a39da%40emagsoftware.it.

[Enrico Maria Giordano]

Il 16/08/2024 10:51, oleksa ha scritto:

> Hmm, as i correctly understand the rules of git of any reposatory, if
> you don't created it and wanna have write access to repositories, you
> should ask to add one, aren't?
>

> Should...? Why?
> Maybe the developers should have asked Antonio's permission to create a
> repository on github?
> And, i don't remember him being involved in the discussion of moving the
> project to github.

Because it is the official Harbour recovery, not any fork, isn't it? For
respect to Antonio, it should have write access, this is my opinion.

--
Enrico Maria Giordano

[oleksa]

Okay, the harbor father should:

- be a project leader

- be a project administrator

- manage project development

- review and respond to all pull requests and issues

And what mean "SHOULD", if he wan't it, why it "should". You are wanna force him to should write changes to repository, for what?

As we can see, interest in harbour development is down, there are no new developers, people who would expand the documentation or write a manual, there are no new ways of development, ideas, promotion, and more ... But If Antonio's write access right changes this situation about Harbour, then it whould be cool, but I don't think that's the point..

By the way, Antonio, what is the result of your survey, how many of us are there https://groups.google.com/g/harbour-users/c/Vjxja4-oNdo ?

Regards,

Oleksii

16 серпня 2024, 11:57:59, від "Enrico Maria Giordano" <e.m.gi...@emagsoftware.it>:

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Harbour Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to harbour-deve...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-devel/58c0ae2f-288a-4934-a1e8-07737375a43e%40emagsoftware.it.

[oleksa]

Sorry, i mean:

Okay, the harbour father should (?):

- be a project leader ?

- be a project administrator ?

- manage project development ?

- review and respond to all pull requests and issues ?

...

Regards,

Oleksii Myronenko

16 серпня 2024, 13:48:40, від "oleksa" <m.ol...@ukr.net>:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-devel/1723801008.0658419000.z57dnsjs%40frv54.fwdcdn.com.

[Enrico Maria Giordano]

Il 16/08/2024 12:48, oleksa ha scritto:

> Okay, the harbor father should:
> - be a project leader
> - be a project administrator
> - manage project development
> - review and respond to all pull requests and issues
>
> And what mean "SHOULD", if he wan't it, why it "should". You are wanna
> force him to should write changes to repository, for what?

Please reread carefully Antonio's messages.

> As we can see, interest in harbour development is down, there are no new
> developers, people who would expand the documentation or write a manual,
> there are no new ways of development, ideas, promotion, and more ...
> But If Antonio's write access right changes this situation about
> Harbour, then it whould be cool, but I don't think that's the point..

Ok, I taken note that you don't want Antonio to have write access. Are
you the creator and the owner of the official Harbour repository? Who
gives you that rights?

[oleksa]

16 серпня 2024, 14:02:49, від "Enrico Maria Giordano" <e.m.gi...@emagsoftware.it>:

Il 16/08/2024 12:48, oleksa ha scritto:

> Okay, the harbor father should:
> - be a project leader
> - be a project administrator
> - manage project development
> - review and respond to all pull requests and issues
> 
> And what mean "SHOULD", if he wan't it, why it "should". You are wanna 
> force him to should write changes to repository, for what?

Please reread carefully Antonio's messages.

Ok, reread and don't see that Antonio wants write rights which you wanna fo him

> As we can see, interest in harbour development is down, there are no new 
> developers, people who would expand the documentation or write a manual, 
> there are no new ways of development, ideas, promotion, and more ... 
> But If Antonio's write access right changes this situation about 
> Harbour, then it whould be cool, but I don't think that's the point..

Ok, I taken note that you don't want Antonio to have write access.

I don't said that i want or wan't that Antonio have write access, don't manipulate, please.

 Are 
you the creator and the owner of the official Harbour repository?

No, not me.

 Who 
gives you that rights?

Rights fot what?

Regards,

Oleksii Myronenko

-- 
Enrico Maria Giordano

http://www.emagsoftware.ithttp://www.emagsoftware.it/emgmusichttp://www.emagsoftware.it/spectrumhttp://www.emagsoftware.it/tbosg

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Harbour Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to harbour-deve...@googlegroups.com

.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-devel/29a18586-0431-426a-a6fc-11de016b6d14%40emagsoftware.it.

[Antonio Linares]

If there is no objection, I would like to have write access to the repository.

I kindly ask for it, thanks

[oleksa]

Ok, now it's a case for maintainer Viktor Szakats or Przemyslaw Czerpak.

Regards,

Oleksii Myronenko

16 серпня 2024, 14:51:06, від "Antonio Linares" <antonio....@gmail.com>:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-devel/e7a74699-8b82-400a-be28-c90c5c06b997n%40googlegroups.com.

[Bacco]

About what Enrico said: all harbour users deserve respect,

this is not a "entitlement" repository, but a technical one

about a real work tool, so with all due respect to Antonio

Linares, I as a long time user don't care who "had the

idea", just the real implementation and serious commitment

of who is mantaining the code, in special Viktor and Przemek

(and all other active contributors obviously). Also, the criteria

of what should be in the core and what not and how code

is implemented matters more than quantity of dangling parts.

Note that I'm not opposing or approving the idea of anyone

specific getting write access, but my question is "what criteria

will this new person apply?" - as it will affect all users directly.

If this repo was mantained with different criteria, probably

some users wouldn't even be using Harbour in the first place.

Perhaps they never knew that Harbour exists.

In other words, I'm trying to bring back the focus on the

only important thing here, Harbour, in technical terms,

and what it represents to the final user, not personal feelings

as the thread predictaly became.

A question to Antonio: would you aprove all 17 requests?

(I belive a reasonable part shouldn't even be there...)

What are your objective with write access, so the current

mantainers can make an informed decision?

Regards,

Bacco

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-devel/1723809776.0452132000.z762p9rx%40frv54.fwdcdn.com.

[Aleksander Czajczynski]

Hello Antonio!

Harbour is really useful compiler and build environment that you've
started, for me it just works everywhere, so i may be biased ;)

Antonio Linares wrote:
>
> I understand your proposal, but honestly, I don't see why I should
> follow these steps, especially when I don't have write access to the
> repository. What's the point of me writing a Release Notes / What's
> New document if I can't commit changes to the repository? Wouldn't it
> be more practical for someone with write access to take care of this?
> Additionally, if the goal is to simplify the GitHub workflow, wouldn't
> it be better to simplify the contribution process instead of adding
> more steps?
>

This is because lack of a release exposes the real problem and it's
really really sad. You don't have to do anything, and we keep on going
as usual, with barely anything happening (reminder: it's not how i see
it). And by what means writing a text document requires instant write
access to the repo? I know, it's not freedom anymore or is it lack of
trust for the Harbour repository keepers who prevent any changes?

Clone the repository, make it public, try to not make breaking changes
if you want those to be pulled, notify on developers list - that is git
workflow. If you aim for a cloned repository that does regularly sync
both ways, not a definitive fork[1], what's wrong about that? As for
write access, i'm not the one who assigns, but a new stable release
would naturally make dev tree more open to accepting commits from those
who would like to try, monitor and bugfix their own contributed code.
Some Harbour users are comfortable with 3.2 as development release,
other would prefer stable, where we current tree have to fit for both
right now.

[1] - for example saying goodbye to ANSI C -
https://github.com/marcosgambeta/harbourpp-v1 - big effort!

Best regards, Aleksander

[Alexandre Cavalcante Alencar]

Hello,

Not a direct contributor, I follow the project from time to time...

Who should have (write) access?

- As any open source project, this is directly influenced by the trust level and contributions, it is natural and will come over time.

- Current maintainers may update the How to participate[1] section to make it even more clear[2]?

- Pull Request process works very well[3], maybe you just need to nudge maintainers here and there, they have their day jobs.

- If something is not acceptable because it is not good enough, ask for suggestions, improve it or drop it, don't take it personally.

How to keep the changelog/release notes?

- Current format is cumbersome for sure

- Victor's solution https://github.com/vszakats/hb/commit/0161a37e7a568b7da312e68993bfaa51d5a0b037

- Github Automated release notes https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/releasing-projects-on-github/automatically-generated-release-notes

- Keep a changelog https://keepachangelog.com/en/1.1.0/ and Github Actions https://github.com/marketplace/actions/keep-a-changelog-new-release

- Convetional Commits https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/#specification and related tools https://github.com/conventional-changelog

References

[1] https://github.com/harbour/core?tab=readme-ov-file#how-to-participate

[2] https://github.com/vszakats/hb/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md

[3] https://github.com/harbour/core/issues/144

Bests

Alexandre Alencar

AWS CSA-PRO, COBIT, ITIL, CSM, LPI, MCP-I

LinkedIn | X/Twitter

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Harbour Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to harbour-deve...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-devel/66BF9584.6070104%40fki.pl.

[Francesco Perillo]

I think we miss a Benevolent dictator for life (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictator_for_life) that takes care of the project.

But I also think that:

1. Harbour was born as a clipper compatible compiler and as such, it is complete. There is a patch from time to time, but it is complete and we don't have to evolve it if we don't change the name.

2. Harbour supports a lot of old and niche platforms. This is a really big accomplishment but also a big problem when we have to create a new release

3. Harbour includes a lot of libs in the contrib directory... how many of them are obsolete, how many of them are really used ? Can we prune some of them ?

4. "End-user" programmers (people using harbour to create programs to sell) are very few, geographically scattered all over the world and using harbour with a lot of different combinations of C compilers (bcc, gcc, microsoft) and libraries (sqlrdd, hwgui, hbQt, hmg, minigui extended.... just to name a few) and almost all won't ever think about changing their tools... 

5. I saw in these years several tries to rewrite libraries and now a porting to c++. It may sound interesting but looking at some of the commits I can't understand the added value of this porting. My fault. I may be interested but I can't understand the goal. Can anyone give a reason to this port ?

6. About repository write access.. I had it in the past, used it rarely, I don't want to risk to break a combination of compiler/library creating a problem for someone.

So my proposal is to:

A. fork a new project, or use harbourpp as a base and extend the language... but in which direction ? By who ? With which goal ? Anyway, a new project,a HarbourNG can break or extend clipper compatibillity

B. a lot of old platforms should be pruned. They will still work on the 3.2 branch and some patches may be backported but on HarbourNG branch they are gone forever. No need to support nor test.

C. Prune a lot of contrib libs. I prefer to prune almost all and make them external projects like ruby gems, npm and the likes. Addons directory is already supported in hbmk2

D. Shrink the supported compilers on each paltform.  Do we need to support Pelles C ?  Define a minimum baseline like Windows XP ?... Windows 7 ? Do we need to support os/2 ? For the libraries, it would be nice if they would comply to the addons directory, the ones that are source code available.

E. Switching to c++ may be nice but why not Rust?

F. we miss a Benevolent dictator for life:-)))

In the lock-down weeks I was thinking that since everybody here (or almost everybody) is using the last revision of Harbour, it is production ready and a new release can be done.

We may just set a Harbour 3.2 RC1 (Release Candidate 1) tag just to not make it directly GA and show that the project is still alive and a lot of changes have been done since 3.0.

Francesco

[Eric Lendvai]

I believe we should seriously consider planning for Harbour 4. We will maintain Harbour 3.2 for legacy purposes, but we should explore what Harbour 4 could encompass.

Harbour 4 could be developed in a separate repository with an active list of developers who have write access.

Here are some potential features for Harbour 4:

- Discontinue support for outdated C compilers.
- Clean up the contributions.
- Drop support for 32-bit systems.
- Include builders for the latest 2 or 3 versions of Windows, Linux (Ubuntu), and macOS.
- Add support for interoperability with other languages such as Python, JavaScript, Java, and C#.
- Implement named parameters for functions and methods.
- Introduce generators (yield) similar to Python.
- Enable the ability to clone a work area, allowing multiple instances of the same table or in-memory table.
- Incorporate embedded SQL for result tables from queries to PostgreSQL, MariaDB, MySQL, MSSQL, Oracle, etc., which would allow running SQL queries on in-memory tables returned from backend queries.

Regarding documentation, do we need a global changelog now that we are on GitHub? Each commit should describe what is included.

Commits to version 3.2 can be replicated to Harbour 4 when appropriate.

I am not convinced that switching to C++ or Rust would offer significant benefits. Python and PostgreSQL are both written in pure C and have been very successful as open-source projects. However, allowing contributions in C++ or Rust could be interesting.

What about having some of the current contributors train a new generation of contributors? There is currently no proper contributor documentation. Even I would be willing to participate in such training.

Just my two cents! :)

[Antonio F.S.]

Hello.

Let's see if I am lucky and this time my opinion is admitted to the forum. :-)

Eric, your input on what could be done initially to give Harbour a boost is very interesting.

Some time ago you asked me to collaborate with the creation of a web site for Harbour when you saw a sample that I showed you (I put the link below) and I replied that if it wasn't to collaborate in a group order with a more or less calculated approach, then no. I didn't think it would be possible. Today, with your approach, I say yes; that I join it in case my participation would be of help.

Best regards.
Antonio F.S.

P.S.
Prototype example of the above-mentioned website (it is just a sketch to get an idea)

harbour.antoniofs.me


....................................................................

El 18/8/24 a las 7:59, Eric Lendvai escribió:

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Harbour Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to harbour-deve...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-devel/c66aa5bc-93b5-4909-9786-0b0389f2c2adn%40googlegroups.com.

[Harbour Developers]

On Sunday 18 August 2024 at 13:19:55 UTC+3 antoni...@gmail.com wrote:

Let's see if I am lucky and this time my opinion is admitted to the forum. :-)

Hi,

For Your Information:  Luck (the goddess) , most probably, does spend zero amount

of her interest and/or time in this group. ;-)
What is actually happening is that new members' posts are moderated,

(mainly for the fear of spammers, secondarily for the elimination 

of unnecessary/off-topic noise).

So, if it's the **first** time you (or anybody else) post here,

the posted message remains pending for approve,

something which is a matter of a few minutes to few hours 

to be addressed. Hope this help in  clearing things a bit.

[Antonio Linares]

Dear friends,

Przemek kindly provided me write access already  👍🏻 🤗

We just want to do some minor updates on the Harbour executable shown date, website and documentation.

thank you

[Enrico Maria Giordano]

Il 19/08/2024 14:52, Antonio Linares ha scritto:

> Dear friends,
>
> Przemek kindly provided me write access already 👍🏻 🤗

I'm very happy about that! Thank you, Przemek!

--
Enrico Maria Giordano

[Mario]

Hi friends,

I've noticed that the Windows Nightly Build hasn't been updated since August 2023 and has stopped working since then. I’d like to contribute to resolving this issue but am unsure where to start.

If anyone could kindly guide me or point me in the right direction, I’d be eager to learn and assist in getting it up and running again.

Looking forward to your response!

Cheers,

Mario

[Francesco Perillo]

The build system worked everyday flawlessy for all this time.... but at the time of uploading the installers it could not agree to a key exchange algorithm... I will have a look next week (or tomorrow if I find the time)

Francesco

[Mario]

Hi Francesco,

Thank you for taking your time to check that.

Regards,

Mario

On Thu, Dec 5, 2024 at 7:22 PM Francesco Perillo <fper...@gmail.com> wrote:

The build system worked everyday flawlessy for all this time.... but at the time of uploading the installers it could not agree to a key exchange algorithm... I will have a look next week (or tomorrow if I find the time)

Francesco

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Harbour Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/harbour-devel/lBhNXdKAvTk/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to harbour-deve...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-devel/CADPHLr9cEFGuZEFxD7eh8BqNXi2ZuaAfrJqR1Ldm%3Dmtv%3DD%3DOew%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mario]

By the way... the nice hbmk2 tool needs a little fix to allow MingW64 version 14.2.0 (latest) to be used due to a missing feature.

The problem is that hbmk2 is looking for  i686-w64-mingw32-windres.exe instead of looking for windres.exe and verion 14.2.0 of MingW64 has windres.exe ...

So I created a pull request here.

It is a simple and easy fix.

Someone with writting access could look at it and commit the required change, please?

Thank you!

[Antonio Linares]

done

many thanks

[oleksa]

Hello Antonio,

still 11 pending open pull request (two year ago was 17)

and now, who is in charge to review them? Users want to help and we ignore them? Mayby AI?

Regards,

Oleksii

14 серпня 2024, 19:17:55, Від "Antonio Linares" <antonio....@gmail.com>:

who is in charge to review them ?

Users want to help and we ignore them ?

thanks

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Harbour Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to harbour-deve...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/harbour-devel/1c902699-0eef-4f57-a456-b6d84f2a7370n%40googlegroups.com.