"develop" Branch for Beta Release?

[JimmyKenMerchant]

I humbly believe that Beta or Release will be published. I tested 1.3.0-a and confirmed it has brand new GUI designs and futures. How about adding "develop" and accept pull requests on the branch, and making "master" for Beta or Release?

[oldcastlehq]

Yeah..any sign towards 1.3 would be welcome.

[Veratil]

Eventually, if I remember the all the chats correctly, the master branch will be a rolling release and we'll release tagged versions as it goes.

[oldcastlehq]

I'm ok with that, but the last rolling/alpha/appimage release was in 2021-04-26

[Spekular]

Hence "eventually". Adding a develop branch would not solve the issue of more frequent releases, and the proposal is just an inverse of the workflow we've used for 1.2 (create a stable branch and allow master to develop further). If you want signs of 1.3 I suggest checking the repository's commit history, and in particular the issue for the ongoing reorganization that we intend to finish before 1.3.

[JimmyKenMerchant]

Audacity uses master branch as develop, using beta release (Audacity's releases page on Github). Seems the tail commit on each on master. You can notify the time for bug fix by tagging beta, and stopping to merge pull requests of new futures.

[ItsCubeTime]

Came to say the same thing. Its been almost 2 years since the last release for a software that gets plenty of weekly commits.

Unless the developers are rewriting major parts of the software from scratch - resulting in lots of bugs that are yet to be smashed, a new release anytime soon would be more than feasible lol

[Veratil]

We're finishing up two final steps in a reorganization process which has unfortunately taken a long time. After that we can make a new alpha build and then start focusing on bigger changes we want to do.

[Veratil]

That being said, there are ways to get newer builds from the pull requests themselves since our CI does full builds. ;)

[Veratil]

Here's the latest merged PR builds: #6320 (comment)

[Veratil]

disclaimer: don't use those builds for anything you are working on with the 1.2.2 version without making backups

[tresf]

I know I'm a year late on this discussion, but a developer got 99% there in releasing nightlies here: LMMS/lmms.io#351.

[tresf]

Another year later, nightlies are working. We even have pull-request installers available now via https://lmms.io/download/pull-request/<ID> so you can install and test a pending feature without compiling it.

[charbelnicolas]

How come Linux's nightlies require wine?

[charbelnicolas]

I have not installed it since it requires to download wine, so I don't really know. I'd rather not have to download wine needlessly. I'll just wait another decade for the full stable release I guess.

[tresf]

Where are you getting your nighties from? Our nightlies are AppImages, which shouldn't require downloading of anything.

Wine is used for VST2 plugins, but is optional. Waiting for a stable release won't magically fix an issue with the installer. Furthermore, snarky remarks about the release cycle just make the few devs we have more salty. It's not welcome and it won't be tolerated.

[charbelnicolas]

I'm using lmms-git from the Arch User Repository which requires wine. I didn't know you had AppImages.

Furthermore, snarky remarks about the release cycle just make the few devs we have more salty. It's not welcome and it won't be tolerated.

Sorry about that :)

[tresf]

I'm using lmms-git from the Arch User Repository which requires wine. I didn't know you had AppImages.

Gotcha. Yeah, you'll have to take that up with the Arch maintainer. We don't provide any packages for Arch directly, so forcing wine as a dependency is a decision of that AUR maintainer. You can probably fork that AUR and just comment out the wine stuff.

Historically on platforms like Debian, they would call the packages lmms and lmms-full or something like that to allow users to side-step the wine requirement, but these packages are always maintained by contributors of those distros so we don't have control over those decisions.

There's also a snap flatpak package available. It's not officially maintained by us either although that maintainer does file bugs here occasionally so it's pretty close to being official. I think the flatpak version will install Wine also (the snap version of wine?), but I haven't tried it myself.

Edit: I don't think there's a nightly flatpak, so that probably isn't useful in the context of this conversation.

[charbelnicolas]

Alright, thank you, I'll see what I can do!