>>> On 7/4/2008 at 12:58 AM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Carlo
Marcelo Arenas Belon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 10:42:06AM -0700, Bernard Li wrote:
>> -1
>> 
>> I agree with Brad on this.
> 
> Not sure what to make of no one replying to the code on this thread, after
> all this is a developer mailing list and I would expect all debate to be
> made in a technical basis.
> 

The technical reason for not accepting this proposal at this time is the risk 
of destabilizing the 3.1 branch before releasing 3.1.1 without solving any real 
issue.  The goal right now is to stabilize the 3.1 branch so that we can 
release 3.1.1.  Adding support for a C++ compiler is closer to being an 
enhancement similar to adding support for perl or ruby, than it is a bug fix.  
I have no problem at this point with the backport proposal and patches for 
adding support for a C++ compiler except for the fact that they touch a 
significant amount of code and have a much greater potential for destabilizing 
the 3.1 branch than they do for fixing a real issue.  For the 3.1.1 release, 
this is simply a matter of documentation and noting that the unsupported "C++" 
portion of the language label "C/C++" is a known issue that will be resolved in 
the next release.     

>> So C++ support is incomplete
> 
> C++ support doesn't exist in the 3.1 branch at all.
> 
>> we should document this and keep going.
> 
> Instead, we should fix this and keep going, a starting point to add that
> support has been implemented in trunk for a couple of days, and will
> be posting it for review/testing for backport to 3.1
> 

I would agree if the patch didn't touch so much code in relation to the issue 
that it is trying to solve.  There is no need to have C++ compiler support in 
Ganglia 3.1.1.  Once we release 3.1.1, we can risk destabilizing the branch 
briefly while we add C++ compiler support and move toward a release of 3.1.2.  
Let's do what is necessary to get 3.1.1 out the door and then worry about 
enhancing Ganglia to support more languages or compilers.  There is a lot of 
needed functionality in Ganglia 3.1 that has been waiting around for a long 
time.  Let's not delay it any more than we have to for functionality that to my 
knowledge, is not needed yet by anybody.

As I mentioned in a previous email thread, this is Open Source.  Release early, 
release often.  There is nothing that says that we can't release a stable 3.1.1 
with current functionality and then a month later release 3.1.2 with new 
functionality that includes support for a C++ compiler.  It really comes down 
to weighing current stable functionality against known issues.  IMO, releasing 
the current stable functionality of 3.1.1 far out-weights the risk of 
destabilizing the 3.1 branch just to add support for a C++ compiler.  

We are going on another month now.  Let's get 3.1.1 out the door and move on.

Brad 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by: SourceForge.net Community Choice Awards: VOTE NOW!
Studies have shown that voting for your favorite open source project,
along with a healthy diet, reduces your potential for chronic lameness
and boredom. Vote Now at http://www.sourceforge.net/community/cca08
_______________________________________________
Ganglia-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ganglia-developers

Reply via email to