On 28 January 2010 08:54, Steffen Mueller <[email protected]> wrote:
> There's this branch in branches/Padre-slave-driver that has the memory
> consumption/threading optimizations that Adam blogged about. It works
> well on my computer (linux), but it's a pretty devious and significant
> change. To the best of my knowledge, it's also only been tested by me
> despite my multiple suggestions on IRC that others should give it a
> shot. Now, I guess our development model or our developers mindset is
> such that it won't get a lot of testing time *unless* I just dump it
> into the trunk and let Murphy figure it out. I'm certain there'll be
> breakage.

As a lurker, user, and very occasional hacker, I wasn't at all aware
of this branch. I don't honestly know where most of the discussion of
padre happens, but my impression is that it's split between this list,
IRC, and trac.

I don't follow the channel because padre is a minority interest of
mine, and I'd rather get information about it occasionally and
asynchronously. I am quite happy to help test branches for major
structural changes to padre such as this one; the best way to reach me
is through this mailing list. I don't know how many other lurkers
there are who are in a similar situation to me.

> This suggests two possible routes:
> a) Make a release now, then merge the branch into trunk. Buys us time to
> fix things.
> b) Merge the branch into trunk and delay the release until we're certain
> we've fixed the most serious issues. Could make Padre 0.56 an even more
> significant release (cf. Adam's blog entry).
>
> I'd love to have this in the upcoming (hyped) 0.56 release. But it's
> quite risky and it might be better to stick with a). What do you guys think?

I don't like the idea of releasing something which hasn't been tested.
Padre is now mature enough that I use it as my usual IDE to get things
done, and I think CPAN releases should aspire to some level of
stability. By releasing undertested code, you're making testing the
ordinary user's job instead of the people who choose to be involved
with the development process.

I support the idea that 0.56 should be left as is, and we either fold
the branch into trunk after release or push to get as many people
testing the branch as possible. I'm going to check out the branch
right now and compare it to 0.55 on my machine.

tl;dr version: I am very happy to test this branch, provided I can do
so on my own terms :)

Phil
_______________________________________________
Padre-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.perlide.org/mailman/listinfo/padre-dev

Reply via email to