Alright, java code is gone in r677478. Once the php code is gone then we can delete the old js stuff too. Then, we will -almost- be rid of all duplicate code confusion! Yea!
- Cassie On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Cassie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cool. I can delete the java based GadgetDataServlet and will also flip the > bit to true. That way whoever submits first won't break the other. > > - Cassie > > > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Chris Chabot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Thanks Paul! >> >> I'll go and remove the GadgetDataServlet based code tomorrow and flip the >> switch in the default container.js to useRest : true. >> >> So consider the 8 hour notice guys :) >> >> -- Chris >> >> >> On Jul 17, 2008, at 1:52 AM, Paul Lindner wrote: >> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/shindig/branches/reTIRED >>> >>> is now created. Feel safe in ripping code out. >>> >>> >>> On Jul 16, 2008, at 1:53 PM, Kevin Brown wrote: >>> >>> 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! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> Paul Lindner >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> >>> >> >
