Isn’t it interesting how we* don’t consider something open source until it gets published on a specific proprietary SaaS application?
* some (many?) of us
This is why I hate that people say github is the home of open source :( I think I’d honestly would rather put my stuff on savannah…
I’ve written a tool to do this using Docker “build containers”. For the non-amd64 linux stuff you’d have to setup a cross compiler, but it is doable. You can find the tool at https://bitbucket.org/rw_grim/convey.
Thanks! This looks like it’s solving a very similar problem as the one I have. So this is a tool to specify the build environment for Pidgin across multiple platforms? And I assume you have some kind of continuous build/testing, like either pre-release or pre/post-commit?
Is there a dashboard for the continuous build? I’d be interested to see what it looks like.
It seems like newer open source projects use cloud services for this, but older ones roll have their own servers… I might want to use my own servers too.
Right now it’s just being triggered by bamboo. You can see it at https://bamboo.pidgin.im but it’s not setup to use all of this yet. I need to finish building some Docker images for some dependencies and stuff.
Aside from that I am working on (albeit slowly) a webapp that’s specially for this so you don’t need to use Jenkins/Bamboo/etc.
Oh what’s the issue with Bamboo? (I’ve never used it.) Is it an issue of not being open source, or not having features you need? What about Jenkins?
The problem with all of them is having to maintain configurations for a ton of platforms outside of the repo which drives their changes.
Nearly 12 years old and there’s still new versions of this stuff coming out. I don’t understand why they don’t just throw this upstream or something.
Luckily I’ve never hit RSI so I basically use whatever keyboard is available the the time. I’ve dabbled in mechanical keyboards but I honestly don’t notice any difference from typing on a rubber dome except for the noise.
I’m currently back in the lovely tiled arms of i3wm.
I really appreciate the tiled window layout approach, but i3 also plays nice with dialog windows, and it has an explicit floating mode for when you really need it. At work and at home I use a Dell Ultrasharp IPS with 2560x1440 resolution.
i3 as well. The thing I like about it, over other tiling window managers I’ve tried, is that layout is manual: you can decide on the fly how you want windows laid out, rearrange them, restack, etc instead of having a single hardcoded layout that everything goes in.
I also use this tool by fellow lobster @cmhamill to get wmii-like dynamic workspace tagging. Just using numbered workspaces, I frequently tend to run out.
(I migrated to i3 over wmii, which is similar but a bit more restricted, mostly for a more elegant internal model and support for a small handful of additional window manager hints. There is something (several somethings, really) to be said for the fact that wmii’s event loop is literally a shell script, but I wasn’t making any use of the capabilities. i3 supports massively more sophisticated layouts than wmii, but the interface makes my brain hurt, so in practice I don’t use them much.)
i3 for me too. I am interested to see how things evolve; I’m running Fedora which is shaping up to make a move to Wayland; others will almost certainly follow. As I understand it i3 doesn’t currently support Wayland, so it’ll be interesting to see if the maintainers make the port, or if Sway will become the replacement.
Either way, I love i3.
It’s going to be interesting to see what happens with tiling window managers and wayland, since from what I understand application sunder Wayland are going to be drawing their own window decorations, which conflicts pretty hard with tiling WMs.
It’s a lot more complicated than that. The Wayland- aware applications (some QT versions and some GTK versions) can be forced to ignore drawing decorations, and a lot of applications run from XWayland which is “all of the Xorg.server inside a .so and some conversion” that follow the old model. THEN you have unstable protocols that extend wayland, like the one used by KWin that says ‘no, decorations should be server-side’. A rant from the WLC developer (that provides most of the compositor implementation for Sway):
i3 for me as well.
It hits the sweet spot between being customisable, yet having sensible defaults and having the ability to completely fade away into the background so that I don’t have to think about it at all on most days.
At work I’m on OSX, but at home I can’t get away from i3wm. So good. It’s so good I’m considering reinstalling Ubuntu over my MBP just to use i3wm as a daily driver.
i3wm too, running it on Arch Linux on my ThinkPad and desktop computer. I’ve seen some videos on customization but I feel like I’m just scratching the surface. I use a model M on my desktop so I’m thinking of reusing an old foot pedal I found to emulate the Windows meta key.
I really want to like i3, but the default keybindings interfere with emacs keybindings. Haven’t decided yet if I want to use evil mode in emacs or overhaul the i3 keybindings. Has anyone else found a nice solution to this?
It lets you choose your own meta key as a part of setup, is that enough to prevent interference?
I am a heavy Emacs user. In my i3 configuration, I configured windows key as the $mod key, so there are no conflicts between it and my emacs. (I know some people bind windows-key in their emacs. I am not one of those people.)
I gave it another try with super/windows-key as $mod, and so far I’m loving it, it really does “fade away into the background” as Todd says below. Spent some parts of the day tweaking, I really love the simplicity, so far no compatibility issues (Debian stretch with Gnome).
i3 as well for a couple of months now. Before that I had been running XFCE for a very long time, but I’ll probably stick with i3 for one reason, that workspaces don’t flip on all monitors when switching.