> On Sep 8, 2015, at 2:45 PM, Carsten Ziegeler <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Am 08.09.15 um 17:49 schrieb David Jencks:
>> There are several things I’d like to fix before the next release
>> - ScrIInfo formatting (affecting gogo and non-gogo console commands)
>> - possible issue with existing configurations mentioned on bnd[tools] list
>> - circular reference problem.
>> 
> Ok, fair enough - do you have any rough timeline for this? :)
> If there are descriptions/issue on what to do I can probably help.

Well, hope springs eternal, maybe this weekend.

I don’t think the bndtools discussion resulted in a felix issue, but I think 
Peter has some way of reproducing the problem.  I can never find him.  Pursuing 
that would be helpful.  From the area the problem is in my guess is that we 
should solve it by writing a ConfigurationTracker using the base tracker 
framework.  I think the problem is of the kind trackers solve, where there are 
two sources of information, one push and one pull, and you need to reconcile 
them.

IIUC Pierre is going to commit a test for the circular dependency problem and 
maybe we can figure out exactly what to do beyond my proposal so far.

> 
>> Also, I hadn’t realized you had modified SCRInfo.  If I understand it,I 
>> don’t like your change :-)  I would like the list command to show both the 
>> description and the configurations, but in highly abbreviated form:
>> 
>> description
>>   configuration1
>>   configuration2
>> 
>> etc.
>> 
>> I believe your code has the problem that if a description is e.g. 
>> configuration required nothing will show up for it.
> 
> Hmm, maybe, I just brought it back to a more compact from which is close
> to the old form.

The old form is completely bogus as it relies on the old introspection 
framework conflating description and configuration and creating a 
“configuration” to represent a description if there isn’t an actual one.  We 
can’t do this any more :-)

thanks
david jencks

> 
> Carsten
> -- 
> Carsten Ziegeler
> Adobe Research Switzerland
> [email protected]

Reply via email to