On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ant elder wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jean-Sebastien Delfino < >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >> >> I'll create a branch to make progress on this Equinox porting effort >> without breaking everybody else. As I said before it'll probably >> take a few weeks to get most Tuscany samples and itests up and >> running, but I'd like to try to have a few core itests and maybe a >> Web Service or two working in the next few days. >> >> >> >> Its been a few weeks now, what are the plans and time frames for merging >> this branch back into the mainstream trunk? >> >> ...ant >> >> > Still making progress on the Equinox bringup, going slowly as I'm busy at > work. Getting the whole runtime really working end to end in Equinox is > going to require changes in many different places in the code, so don't > expect miracles it's going to take time. Some of the changes may be possible > to merge to trunk already if people want to help with that. > > -- > Jean-Sebastien > The problem with helping is that its difficult to work out what are the changes. I've done a diff of the sca-equinox branch to the trunk which is at: http://people.apache.org/~antelder/temp/sca-equinox.diff. Its huge, and lots of the changes seem quite unrelated to OSGi class loading. Some changes from trunk get merged to the branch, some don't, others get modified and then merged, there's also what looks like new development not directly related to OSGi/Equinox that goes into the branch but not trunk. If this branch is to show what changes are needed for Equinox then wouldn't it be clearer if the only changes in the branch were directly related to Equinox? With the diff so huge now how can this ever get merged to trunk? ...ant
