I'll echo a sentiment I've tried to express before. This sort of aggressive refactoring and experimentation is really important to the growth of OpenSim. The "release" process has been focused on trying to figure out a stable point and snapshot-ing that. That places a burden on the "release coordinator" to poll folks for what that stable "snapshot" is. IMO, ideally the heavy refactoring would happen on a branch or separate tree and then pushed to HEAD when it stabilizes.
Again, I'm completely for the heavy research and refactoring focus. But IMO if for a shared project you want to do that you need to adopt a development approach that gracefully allows that to happen. Mike On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 15:37 +0000, Dahlia Trimble wrote: > We need to be careful about how things are broken and make repairs > expeditiously as we also hinder other developers if they are unable to > use their regions for development and testing. > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Melanie <[email protected]> wrote: > Maybe these things need to be broken. We are almost locked > into a > rigid schema, now we still have a chance to go to true > modularity > and we should take it. After all, trunk is meant to be > broken :) > > > Melanie _______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
