On 12-04-2005 22:35, Adam R. B. Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you think we could do without multiple stages completely?
I think it just comes down to order. The walker logic I've preferred most
is the one that iterates through projects, visiting modules (and
repositiories and workspaces,
I'm not wanting us
to design a generic mechanism, just solve our problem, but is the
approach
the right one? Why are these three walks better than (say) putting
Updates/Builders/Databasers(DynaGumper) in sequence inside one mutlicast
plugin?
Do you think we could do without multiple
Why are CvsUpdater, SvnUpdater pre-process plug-ins, not 'process' visitors?
Clearly (as of now) it make little difference, I'm just trying to
understand.
I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the three pre-process/process/post-process
walks. Is this a Gump2 hold over that we want in Gump3? I'm not
