On Sun, 2009-10-18 at 16:16 +0200, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote: > On Sunday 18 October 2009 16:08:29 Richard Purdie wrote: > > > Shout now if you disagree with any of this or have a better plan! :) > > > I like it because this way I can get my parser changes into 1.10.
Right, I failed to mention that but that was also something I had in mind. > One question is how do we proceed on bitbake-2.0? Do you have a set of > specific of issues that need to be addressed for client/server? does > it make sense to create that list? It makes sense and the things I'd like to see addressed are: * Debugging made easier (deadlocks, exceptions and so on) * Performance loss due to xmlrpc mitigated as much as practicable * Improved message handling and user interaction * Real world testing - I'm not sure that code has had this yet Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Bitbake-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bitbake-dev
