On 02/11/2013 10:36 AM, Paul McNett wrote:
On 2/11/13 8:46 AM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On the chance there had been changes that cured my previous issues I cloned the
new
version 0.9.8 from github. It did not solve the existing issues and introduced
new
ones. In that vein, is there going to be some explanation of the new import
scheme?
The changes to the importing happened post-0.9.8. If you clone master instead of
working you'll have 0.9.8, not the work in progress for the next release, which
will
be either 0.9.9 or 1.0.0.
Especially the rationale behind:
implicitImports = False in the settings file.
The rationale is simply that we were loading way too many things upon someone
issuing
'import dabo'. There's a class of users that use very specific things from the
framework inside their web applications, such as only using the biz and data
layer,
but no dApp and no UI, or only using the report writer and nothing else. Rather
than
importing everything everyone would possibly need in 'import dabo', we should
make
things available via explicit import via subpackages.
Setting in to True eliminated major breakage, i.e the app does not load. However
there seems to be other issues even with it set to True.
There have been other commits besides that one to working since 0.9.8 was
released.
The other ones that I expect to cause breakage are listed in wiki pages at:
https://github.com/dabodev/dabo/wiki/_pages
They all have "Dabo 1.0" at the beginning of the page title.
With out some explanation of
what is going on, troubleshooting and fixing is going to be a mess.
Please let me know if those wiki pages need to be expanded, but all in all I
think
the steps required are minimal, armed with tools like grep. I made a ton of
required
changes to all my apps to satisfy these and I don't recall it taking very long
at all.
Anyway, welcome to Monday! :)
From the looks of it there needs to be an evaluation of what is going.
1) There are fundamental changes in the works, which until now have not
been discussed. I for one had no knowledge of the Wiki entry.
2) There does not seem to be a coherent branching/naming strategy.
Master/working does not really tell me anything.
3) Change is not bad, but it should be managed. Right now it looks like
bug fixes and fundamental changes are happening together. I would prefer
to see some sort of branch naming/tagging strategy that would isolate a
bug fix branch from the testing branch.
Paul
--
Adrian Klaver
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users
Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/[email protected]
