We could call it reTIRED; get rid of TIRED by using REST. On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Louis Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1 on retiring. > > Anyone still using that code care to suggest a name as it will likely be > most relevant to them. > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 1:06 PM, Chris Chabot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > +1 on retiring the old GadgetDataServlet code. > > > > It's been a pain in the backside to see features being added to one > > back-end or the other, and it was confusing contributers too; My fingers > > have been itching to be able to make that move, but the java situation > meant > > we needed to wait a bit longer before we could do that because it seemed > > better to time it together w the java version. > > > > In essence doing a mini release or telling people to use revision XXXXX > is > > the same really, just a snapshot in time; But without being able to fix > > things like you could on a branch... so branching has my vote. > > > > This will put some strain on people who are developing using the latest > > version of shindig, but that chose to stick to the old wire format for > now > > (i know of a few of those) but i guess they need to switch over at some > > point anyhow to get 0.8 support, so what better time then the present > right? > > :) > > > > How's other committers feeling about this? As far as i'm concerned sooner > > is better then later :) > > > > -- Chris > > > > > > On Jul 16, 2008, at 7:59 PM, Cassie wrote: > > > > Now that we've decided on a path for the restful java code it's time to > >> figure out how we are going to deprecate the non-rest old code. (ie > >> GadgetDataServlet and friends). I know people are using the old code in > >> prod > >> so it needs to live somewhere and I'm not sure what the proper thing to > do > >> in svn is. > >> > >> - do we branch in svn and put the old code on the branch? (i think the > new > >> rest code should definitely be in "main") > >> - do we just tell people to stay at revision xxx if they want it? > >> - do we do a mini-release? > >> > >> It is probably something else I haven't thought of at all. And php guys > - > >> you will probably have to do this too, so we should probably share the > >> same > >> decision. > >> Thanks again for all feedback. > >> > >> - Cassie > >> > >> ps - just think, we almost have a clean social-api codebase! > >> > > > > >
