On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Simon Laws <simonsl...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> Ok from all this can we look at some of the runtime modules, eg core, >> core-spi, databinding, core-databinding, can we do any tidy up there? >> >> ...ant >> > > With this kind of refactoring I'd rather we plan what we are going to > do across the code base, agree it and then apply it. This incremental > changing of the module structure keeps breaking me as I try to look at > the tests and it's taking me (personally, maybe it's just me) a long > time to recover from module moves. > > I also think we need to get all the requirements on the table as this > is bound to overlap with our need to decide how to prevent the build > getting out of hand and (our old favourite) of how to structure the > features/downloads we actually ship. Nibbling away at it may back us > into a corner. > > Can we start a new thread to get all of the refactoring/restructuring > requirements out on the table. I'm happy to start the thread and give > my 2c if people want me too. > > Regards > > Simon >
Sure ok though without any scoping that could quite easily turn into a bit of a never ending discussion. There's that thread i started earlier today "Making the 2.x build more modular" you could use to add you 2c or start a fresh one. Does not doing refactoring include the remaining policy-xml ones i said this morning i was starting to do and now have ready to commit (hoping you'll not mind this last one as it will go stale v quickly if i don't commit it now)? ...ant
