On Tue, 2013-02-26 at 11:39 -0800, Matt Turner wrote: > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina > <[email protected]> wrote: > > In my opinion you can kill the current catalyst 3 branch as nothing uses > > it and afaik it doesn't work. jmbvicetto should be able to > > authoritatively agree or not. > > If Brian's work is to be the basis for future revisions of catalyst, > it should be the master branch. We can branch current master as a > stable branch. The current catalyst2 branch is totally dead, and > overwriting it doesn't cause us to lose anything. >
I generally agree that my rewrite should become the master branch, but it could live in a side branch for a while longer, there are many more changes needed to clean up the code. It is likely to be broken at times some commits by themselves won't be complete, etc... > ... but the patches should be sent to the list (with git > format-patch/send-email) and reviewed before being committed to > master. > I tried using git to send this patch, but it did not work. I'll look into how to make it work with email. But I do question the need to send all patches to this list for review. Take this patch email for instance. It was primarily for the last commit I did to fix the update_seed methods which I found not working correctly. I also mentioned I had rebased all my other work, condensing where it made sense... Do you see any code suggestions, questions and/or comments in regards to it... NO All mails in this thread are about everything else :/ I will continue to spam the list with all my rebased commits, which I intended to do when I had more time. I sent this one off this morning before I went to work. I know Jorge was interested in the changes. I'm back now, so will manually prepare more patch mails.
