Well I definitely wouldn't want to merge before an 0.23 release - what's to be gained?
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Matt Franklin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Chris Geer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Here's the real question. Are we going to do any more releases prior to >> Angular being ready? If not, let's just do it in trunk. I don't think there >> are really any major features other than Angular that are even being worked >> on. >> > > I still think we need a 0.23 release. > > >> >> Chris >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Rohit Kalkur <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > There are still other developers/users of this application that are >> > dependent on the existing functionality (the JSP version) of the >> > application correct? >> > >> > If we are going to shift the primary focus to getting Angular implemented >> > then I think it would make sense. Otherwise, I think it makes more sense >> to >> > maintain the separate branch. >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Matt Franklin <[email protected] >> > >wrote: >> > >> > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Erin Noe-Payne < >> > [email protected] >> > > >wrote: >> > > >> > > > If there are not breaking changes on the angular branch now (and I'm >> > > > not so sure there aren't), then there definitely will be at some >> > > > point. Chris mentioned tests, there are data model changes, there are >> > > > changes in how static content will be delivered, etc. Doing that sort >> > > > of development while having to worry about breaking the production >> > > > version seems like setting ourselves up for a bad time. >> > > > >> > > >> > > IMO, the data model changes need to be done in trunk and not in a >> branch. >> > > Even if we kept angular in its own branch, this means we need to >> update >> > > both the JSP & Angular implementations anyway. There also might be >> some >> > > value in maintaining the JSP UI as a deprecated feature for a while >> until >> > > everyone is able to migrate away to angular. >> > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > If we want to make the angular branch the primary or only focus of >> > > > development going forward, we could potentially make a stable branch >> > > > off of trunk, for bug fixes / release, and develop angular in trunk. >> > > > >> > > >> > > We can (and have) done that for critical fixes when trunk wasn't ready >> to >> > > release. >> > > >> > > My goal in suggesting this is to make the angular development part of >> the >> > > core development effort, if not the whole focus. >> > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Chris Geer <[email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > Matt, >> > > > > >> > > > > The only two considerations from my point of view are: >> > > > > >> > > > > 1) I know there have been several times where tests haven't been >> > > > > functioning on the Angular branch since it wasn't the highest >> > priority. >> > > > > We'd have to ensure we were far enough along to make sure tests >> > > functions >> > > > > on trunk. >> > > > > >> > > > > 2) If we decided to go down the data overhaul we were discussing >> we'd >> > > > have >> > > > > to make sure the changes were applied to both the Angular and >> > existing >> > > > UI. >> > > > > Not a show stopper but might be extra work that isn't worthwhile if >> > the >> > > > > existing UI is going away. >> > > > > >> > > > > Chris >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Matt Franklin < >> > > [email protected] >> > > > >wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > >> I have been taking a look at the angular branch and think that the >> > > > >> prototype work is awesome. I think it is a huge step forward in >> > > > >> implementation flexibility. As I was looking through it, I >> > struggled >> > > a >> > > > bit >> > > > >> with whether or not it needed to be in its own branch. From what >> I >> > > can >> > > > see >> > > > >> in the code, it should be possible to run the old and the new ways >> > in >> > > > the >> > > > >> same war with very few changes. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> What does everyone think about merging the the branch to trunk? >> IMO >> > > it >> > > > is >> > > > >> OK to have an incomplete feature in the main branch so long as it >> > > > doesn't >> > > > >> negatively impact the core functionality. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> > > >> > >>
