Unico Hommes wrote: > > > Ok ok, I get the hint ;-) Oh, that wasn't targetted at you, Unico, but if you have time... :)
> But before I decide to do any work > there is another issue with the blocks build system I'm dying > to resolve. What about having only one repository location > for blocks? I am so tired of all the duplicate effort we have > to do for each and every change to blocks. It shouldn't be neccessary. Yes, and it should be simple. > > There probably isn't a small amount of work involved to get > it working but I'd like to know exactly what it would take to > byte this bullet. > Some of the steps involved that I can distinguish are: > > 1. Merge/sync the current 2.1.x and 2.2 blocks.What blocks > have the biggest differences between their 2.1.x and 2.2 > copy? If there are unresolvable differerences, how to handle > that? Have separate source locations for different versions > in conflicting blocks? Define Cocoon target versions for > individual blocks in gump.xml? > We have to finish the syncing, The wiki still lists some blocks that haven't been synced yet - but again this is simple work. Apart from that, some blocks depend (unfortunately) on some internal things which have changed between 2.1.x and 2.2. The most prominent is of course XSP. But there are others that now take advantage of some new features in 2.2 that aren't available in 2.1.x. So in the end this is not so easy. We could start simple. First move blocks that don't have a difference and leave the different ones in the two branches. But I would strongly suggest that we first finish syncing, can then do a painless 2.1.6 release and then spend energy on this issue. I personally don't want to delay a 2.1.6 release just because of a broken build system etc. Carsten
