On 25/05/2007, at 11:44 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
If you have specific objections about the code from your review of
it, please let's hear them.
[...]
I see you put these in JIRA too. Thanks.
If I fix something or add something on trunk now, I need to make
sure it still exists in the future code. That's the double work,
and it's a disincentive to do anything.
No one has worked at all on trunk, and I doubt anyone will in the
next few weeks. And as I already said the code bases are entirely
divergent so it's not practical to do it in two places.
That's how this came about. Several months ago, Wendy asked me to
look into a problem and that's when I raised the issue. Recently,
Carlos wanted to do a release because there's at least one change on
trunk that he needs. I've had others express interest in contributing
to it. We're all just looking for where we're supposed to work.
I thought that my efforts were better spent helping Raphaël wrap up
the changes and get it back to one set of code.
So do it in NG, it's not double the work.
If that's what you think, then we agree. My only point is that that
should be done here - I've given reasons why doing it at mojo is a
bad idea already.
It will be here soon enough. I don't think is anything really worth
worry about by the time a CLA is processed for either the incubator
or bringing it here directly that will be a week or two, then it
probably won't be long after that it can be brought over.
FWIW, Raphaël already has a CLA on file.
Despite the result of the vote, it's clear there isn't consensus on
this. That is, we remain essentially undecided on whether NG is the
final replacement or not. I'll set myself a reminder to review again
in a few weeks.
Does anyone object to the following plan of action?
- Raphaël continues to work on the NG code separately, but can use
our JIRA planning and should use this list for discussing and getting
feedback
- We'll wait for it to be proposed as a replacement.
- Raphaël should review the current code and particularly
documentation for anything to reuse before proposing it as a replacement
- In the mean time if anyone needs to work on the actual archetypes,
they can with out issue as they won't be replaced initially.
- If anyone has core changes they need/want to make, they need to be
accompanied by thorough integration tests so that they can be re-run
against any replacement code
- If Carlos needs to do a release from trunk, he can.
Cheers,
Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
