On Friday, October 11, 2013 02:58:22 PM Matt Turner wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Brian Dolbec <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2013-10-11 at 12:28 -0700, Matt Turner wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Brian Dolbec <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > This is only > >> > good for running the code directly from the git checkout. > >> > >> actually seems useful. We've had clearly broken commits go upstream, > >> and if the author had been able to test from a git checkout we > >> probably could have avoided that. > > > > Which is why I made the rewrite code able to run from the checkout fully > > and properly. Just cd into the directory, run "source ./testpath" and > > it's will run completely from the checkout. > > > >> What I mean is that I don't want to turn down contributions from new > >> developers because there's a big backlog of work that hasn't gone > >> upstream. > > > > I don't want to discourage others either. It is just much better to > > encourage some help on the rewrite in my opinion. > > No, you should be moving patches that are reviewed and tested to > master (which means rebasing on master and sending patches to the > mailing list). > > > Especially since > > patches 2 & 3 have already been done in the rewrite branch. Some of > > patch 4 might have been done already, but likely not all. If the > > rewrite is to take over from the master branch... > > > > The rewrite is not far from being able to take over as master. There > > are a few rebase errors in the rewrite-on-master you did. There is some > > cleanup work to do on the autoresume operation. Then a little more > > testing with the tree defaults relocated to ensure I haven't missed any > > hard coding. > > The development model on git is to make incremental changes that do > not break things. I've been saying this for a while. > > The code needs to be reviewed as well. Maybe Dylan, who has been > cleaning up a lot of python code in another project, would be willing > to help review as well.
I'd be more than happy to help review things. I've paged through the rewrite- on-master branch a bit, and there's definately some good work going on there, but there are also so things that could be polished up a bit. > > > The default tree location move is waiting on the catalyst rewrite code > > to go live producing stages, etc.. > > I'm exactly sure what this means, but I think you might mean something > like renaming master to old-master and your branch to master. That's > not the right way to do it, and that's not how git works.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
