search

fstl-app / fstl

A fast STL file viewer
463 stars 106 forks source link

New release #83

Closed sur5r closed 2 years ago

sur5r commented 2 years ago

Given several features have been implemented since the 0.9.4 release, maybe it's time to add a milestone for 0.9.5 and decide which issues should be completed for it.

DeveloperPaul123 commented 2 years ago

Yeah this is probably a good idea to get some of the new features out there to people who don't build from source.

I think at a minimum we could version the next release 0.10.0 if not 1.0.0. Thoughts?

sur5r commented 2 years ago

I'd go with 0.10.0. For 1.0 I would like to polish some things and take care of most of the open issues. But I don't care about the exact versioning very much. I consider frequent, incremental releases more important.

DeveloperPaul123 commented 2 years ago

I've added a new pre-release https://github.com/fstl-app/fstl/releases/tag/v0.10.0

I would like to do some more testing and build on Linux as well before fully releasing. Should be able to do the full release soon.

sur5r commented 2 years ago

Just built it on Debian/sid, LGTM.

brunetton commented 2 years ago

Just built on Ubuntu 21.10, works great

DeveloperPaul123 commented 2 years ago

@sur5r @brunetton Would one/both of you be able to test generated rpm and deb packages? The attached zip contains both a RPM and a .deb package. I built them using WSL 2 on Windows.

fstl-0.10.0.zip

brunetton commented 2 years ago

@sur5r @brunetton Would one/both of you be able to test generated rpm and deb packages? The attached zip contains both a RPM and a .deb package. I built them using WSL 2 on Windows.

fstl-0.10.0.zip

I can only deb package, as I'm using Ubuntu and the result is: OK, no problems here. But I probably still have all dependencies, so it's probably not a super test. It would be better to start from a fresh installation.

sur5r commented 2 years ago

The binary from the .deb works fine, but I would strongly advise against distributing that. It does not specify any dependencies which will result in odd bug reports. If you want to ship an upstream .deb, please have a look at the Debian packaging and use that. Maybe this could be done via GitHub actions as well.

DeveloperPaul123 commented 2 years ago

The binary from the .deb works fine, but I would strongly advise against distributing that. It does not specify any dependencies which will result in odd bug reports. If you want to ship an upstream .deb, please have a look at the Debian packaging and use that. Maybe this could be done via GitHub actions as well.

Yes, I've been playing around with it and I realized there are some things missing in the Debian packaging steps that we need to take care of before actually shipping that binary. Hopefully we can eventually figure that out and have it automatically built for releases via Github Actions as you mentioned.

DeveloperPaul123 commented 2 years ago

0.10.0 has now been released. We'll work on fixing Linux packaging in the future.