Mr. Meitar Moscovitz wrote:
> On Feb 6, 2009, at 9:35 AM, Jeremy Slade wrote:
> 
>> I've been using laconica for a couple weeks now, and it's been working
>> well -- props to the team.
>>
>> My instance is deployed in a corporate internet, so there are a number
>> of features that simply don't make sense (SMS, twitter integration).
>> It's easiest to deal with just by hacking references to those things
>> out of the rendered html.
>>
>> Problem is, I first deployed on 0.6.4.3, and today I'm moving to
>> 0.7.0, and I have to do the same changes all over again...
> 
> If that doesn't let you get rid of the things you want, you probably
> should set up a "vendor branch" of Laconica and keep your changes in
> your own branch. Merge new official versions of Laconica into your own
> changed branch. This is what I do for projects I need to segregate in
> that way, and it works a treat. (Especially with git.)

I am working in my own branch and merging in from the official laconica
upstream repository pulled into the master branch.  In theory that works
 fine (and git certainly helps make it easier than I've experienced with
other scm systems).  But as stated, because of the significant changes
between 0.6.4.3 and 0.7.0, I had to re-apply all my changes -- every
thing I had changed conflicted with remote changes in the merge.

Having a more well-defined MVC architecture wouldn't prevent that, but
could help to reduce the scope of the conflicts.


Jeremy
_______________________________________________
Laconica-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.laconi.ca/mailman/listinfo/laconica-dev

Reply via email to