Difference between revisions of "Liblicense 04 release todo"

From Creative Commons
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 5: Line 5:
** OLPC integration
** OLPC integration
*** Journal integration
*** Journal integration
** i18n
* bugs/issues
* bugs/issues

Revision as of 18:21, 31 July 2007

  • features
    • KDE4 integration
      • system settings module
      • file properties license tab
    • OLPC integration
      • Journal integration
    • i18n
  • bugs/issues
    • License chooser api ironing out (http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-devel/2007-July/000539.html). I could wrap the flags to hide the bit-shifting -- but before I do that, I want feedback as to whether this design, in general, works.
    • Use SONAME so applications can request a particular version of liblicense's API/ABI
      • Debian will require this (and everyone else is crazy if they don't)
      • I found one explanation of it while Googling
    • not clear what default-content-license does, exactly- maybe replace 'Default Content License' with 'choose the default license for new content you create' or something like that? (whatever is accurate  :)
    • I'd get rid of the frame around the license chooser. Not used by most gnome apps.
    • URI: what goes there? I assume the license URI, but I'd expect the license chooser would set that, and it doesn't appear to.
    • are there sample files somewhere I can test the nautilus extension on?
    • good packaging practice would break this into liblicense and liblicense-devel, one with the apps and app data another with the libraries. Not a huge deal, but would be necessary before getting it into fedora, for example.
  • tag svn
  • package
    • source
    • rpm
    • deb
    • ebuilds (bugs 187196, 185689, and 78021 in gentoo's bugzilla)
    • test them!
    • Known dependencies.
      • libraptor
      • nautilus-python
      • exempi
  • publicity
    • freshmeat
    • sourceforge
    •  ?