Actually, to provide more detail...

There was no functional change here, just a move to reduce the complexity of 
the transitive closure. I do think in other instances where functionality is 
enhanced / modified to remove the database, it is important to create separate 
issues (the next steps are to flesh out the metadata repository, which is 
probably a candidate for this).

Hope that makes sense!

- Brett

On 20/11/2009, at 10:05 AM, Brett Porter wrote:

> Thanks for the reminder - I'll put the issue tag in all the commit messages.
> 
> This all falls under the branch issue (MRM-1025). This particular change 
> could actually be ported back to the mainline as it stands alone - but I 
> don't want to disturb the 1.2.3 work. To some extent, I'm still playing 
> around with what will work before proposing anything more formal :)
> 
> Cheers,
> Brett
> 
> On 20/11/2009, at 4:24 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
> 
>> Seems like a big change, is there a JIRA issue with details?  -Wendy
>> 
>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 10:16 AM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Author: brett
>>> Date: Thu Nov 19 17:16:20 2009
>>> New Revision: 882207
>>> 
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=882207&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> split the scheduler into modules to isolate database and indexer dependent 
>>> code
>> ...
> 

Reply via email to