El mar, 06-06-2006 a las 08:23 +1000, David Crossley escribió: > Thorsten Scherler wrote: > > David Crossley escribi??: > > > > > BTW, i see that the dispatcher copy of resources.xmap does not > > > > > use the locationmap at all, whereas the main one does. > > > > > > > > We (I think Ross mainly did it) updated the xmap and extracted the > > > > matches to lm recently. The dispatcher resources.xmap did not got > > > > adopted after this changes. > > > > > > I meant that if someone is investigating the issue, > > > then please work from the main copy. > > > > > > I have noticed a trend lately that when people are > > > helping to investigate core issues, they are considering > > > dispatcher only. We still have skins as default. > > > > I do not understand what you are trying to say. > > I will try to be a bit more explicit without naming names. > > I have noticed that when some people are helping to > investigate *core* issues, they have dispatcher enabled > rather than the default skins. Solutions should be > primarily tested with skins during this phase. Of course > it is good to test in both settings.
ah, now I understand. I am normally testing with dispatcher enabled first but then on a skin enabled seed as well. Doing forrest site and forrest run I consider most important to test. > > Skins are in the core. The dispatcher is using some core stuff but as > > well overriding/extending core code. > > > > If we find a bug for skins and dispatcher and people provide a > > dispatcher specific solution then this may happen for a reason. Even if > > skins still is our default this will change in the next version and IMO > > we should not put too much effort into making a dead horse pretty. > > Well i am striving to get a release out the door, > so i am talking about the situation "now". > Yeah, for testing the release, skin enabled is more important then dispatcher enabled. salu2 -- thorsten "Together we stand, divided we fall!" Hey you (Pink Floyd)
