I would like to start the SOP refactor fairly soon - what if once 0.7 is tagged for the RC process; I go and and make a new branch; we can sic testers on the presence-branch, while dev happens on the branch I tag?
Adam > -----Original Message----- > From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev- > boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Justin Clark-Casey > Sent: Friday, 19 February 2010 3:25 PM > To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Status of presence refactor? > > Melanie wrote: > > > > I would not like to see the refactor start in the branch, because > > that would postpone a merge indefinitely. > > Yes, please whatever happens, do not start any sog refactoring in > Master until presence-refactor has been merged and we've started a > branch for 0.7. > > In fact, when presence-refactor is merged with Master I think that we > should wait at least 2 weeks before branching for 0.7 in order for all > active developers to iron out any significant bugs associated with the > merge. > > At a minimum, the 0.7 branch itself would be subject to the same > release candidate and bug triage procedure as was 0.6.8. Only after > this would 0.7 be tagged. I think that this is the very minimum we > need to do in order to be a credible project. > > This would also give us an opportunity to get the documentation into a > shape where at least super-intelligent pandimensional mice can > understand it :) > > At the same time as 0.7 is branched, I also think that it would be > prudent to branch for a potential 0.7.0.1. If all goes well with the > sog refactor this will never see the light of day. But I think we > should give ourselves a means of working with the old sog code in case > the refactor encounters trouble. The sog refactor is far from trivial. > > > > > However, the refactor caould be started in a NEW branch that is > > based off the current presence-refactor. The friends and SQLite > > functionality could be merged back to that new branch when they are > > completed. Git allows this easily. > > That sounds like a good idea. > > > > > Melanie > > > > > > d...@metaverseink.com wrote: > >> I could, but I'm hesitant to make diva distro releases from branches > >> that aren't the master branch. Plus, so far the differences between > the > >> two branches are purely internal; there is no functional difference, > or > >> new bug fixes, or anything like that. The new architecture will > allow > >> for lots of exciting things to happen, but, again, I'm hesitant in > >> making them happen in the branch. I'd rather merge this to master. > >> > >> > >> Robert Martin wrote: > >>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:15 AM, <d...@metaverseink.com> wrote: > >>>> Sigh. > >>>> It's ready. It's been fully operational for several weeks, modulo > >>>> buglets. It hasn't been merged because the SQLite connector hasn't > been > >>>> redone and at least Melanie doesn't want to merge without it. > >>>> > >>> could you release a copy of Diva with the updated code (since Diva > of > >>> course does not use SQlite)? > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Opensim-dev mailing list > >> Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Opensim-dev mailing list > > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > > -- > Justin Clark-Casey (justincc) > http://justincc.org > http://twitter.com/justincc > _______________________________________________ > Opensim-dev mailing list > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev _______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev