Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/08/2003 10:48:30 PM: > On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 08:14, Rafal Krzewski wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > After a discussion on IRC with Jason this afternoon I've volunteered to > > > roll back CVS Head so it has the pre-refactor code + the changes since, > > > until Jason can spend some more time on getting the refactor working with > > > all the plugins. > > > > > > Does anyone have a problem with rolling back the refactor? > > > > This is really bad news. Porting changes back and forth between the > > branches is a always a waste of effort. > > Yup. I didn't want to check in my stuff until I had worked on it further > but a couple folks wanted to see if ended up not understanding it and it > has indeed been a wasted effort. Not from my angle.
> > The time needed to do that > > could be spent better on fixing the problems in HEAD. > > Yes, but I'm tired of fighting the "I want it now!" mentality. I will > quietly get everything working and test it before I check things in > again. I'd be happy if we could do incremental changes too. > > If there is pressure however to have beta 11 released without the > > memory leak plugged up, a MAVEN_BETA_11 branch could be sprouted > > at the point of pre refactoring tag, and as many bug fixes as possible > > would be ported there. > > You have much experience with branches and this sort of thing and we > could probably learn from your experiences. Do you want to head this up > seeing as you wrote the branches documentation that we have. Sounds good 2 me!!! dIon
