Around now, or last week, would probably be a good time to tag something
stable :-)
I don't mind at all moving this refactoring to a branch, but since we
have never done that I wouldn't even know what to do. I don't expect
this to be bad. The transition to RESTComms was done without almost
anyone noticing it, except the brave explorers in OSGrid who have to
deal with having neighbors on all sorts of different versions. But
except for the version mismatches, which are really impossible to manage
from a development perspective, most people only noticed when suddenly
OpenSim.ini didn't have the remoting port anymore. And RESTComms
actually involved a complete replacement of the underlying protocol from
Remoting to http+REST, which is not the case here -- the protocol won't
change, at least not now.
Charles Krinke wrote:
It is always a balance between keeping functionality in an evolving
project and refactoring and experimenting.
I will support and encourage refactoring and experimentation with one
proviso. That proviso is a few paragraphs on the wiki giving clues to
allow those deploying OpenSim what is going on and how to work around
trunk during a period of refactoring and experimentation.
Charles
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Mike Dickson <[email protected]>
*To:* "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
*Sent:* Thursday, April 30, 2009 8:57:24 AM
*Subject:* Re: [Opensim-dev] moving away from grid vs. standalone
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]
<mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
