I totally understand, and we'll have a branch with this in it right away -- and that branch will be called trunk. ;)
I will also branch off the 2.0 docs for polishing, and leave your new docs in trunk. --Mark Ramm On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 1:28 PM, percious <ch...@percious.com> wrote: > > By the way, we really need HG. I think that should be a goal for > pycon. We need to be able to easily branch on stuff like this. > > Also, i have every confidence that this change will not introduce > errors. I will also be online almost continuously over the next few > weeks for support (9-9 MDT) > > cheers. > -chris > > On Mar 18, 11:23 am, percious <ch...@percious.com> wrote: >> Well, it's in and the docs are updated. Dunno what to say, you >> mentioned this after I had already implemented. >> >> On Mar 18, 6:17 am, Mark Ramm <mark.mchristen...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > I after a bit more thinking about this, and after seeing the size of >> > the change, I think I'm back to thinking this will be a 2.1 feature. >> > But I know it's nice stuff and nesissary for tgext.pages, but the >> > component stuff is a 2.1 goal, and we do have a feature freeze going >> > on, and I need to be more hardcore about enforcing that. >> >> > If we can release 2.0 final, and 2.1 a few weeks later, I'm fine with >> > that, but I don't want to delay or break 2.0 ;) So, to hopefully make >> > everybody happy, I say we leave this in trunk and declare trunk the >> > place for 2.1 work, and I'll create a 2.0 branch right away, based on >> > the rev before this change for the rc1 release. >> >> > What do you think? >> >> > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Gustavo Narea <m...@gustavonarea.net> >> > wrote: >> >> > > Hello, >> >> > > If we're supposed to be in a feature-freeze, that's for people to be >> > > confident >> > > that from now on things aren't going to change, unless a critical bug >> > > has to >> > > be fixed, so that they can start building software and writing about TG2 >> > > with >> > > the guarantee that their product isn't going to expire some days later. >> >> > > I love to see TG2 evolve, but that this has been applied in the >> > > feature-frozen >> > > branch I'm using to write a short series of articles using TG2 and that >> > > it >> > > already out dates the first article (which was delivered)... It really >> > > bothers >> > > me. >> >> > > If I can't trust that we were serious when we announced that feature >> > > freeze, >> > > then I'll switch over to a truly stable framework for my next article. >> >> > > On the other hand, independent of the article I wrote, I think we must >> > > comply >> > > with the feature freeze strictly, specially in non-trivial changes like >> > > this >> > > (splitting a function into three ones, defined in newly-created modules >> > > each). >> >> > > The more complex a change is, the more chances to introduce a bug. And >> > > at this >> > > point we shouldn't take the risk of introducing bugs, but just fix the >> > > remaining ones. >> >> > > Finally, I think this change has to be moved to the upcoming 2.1 branch >> > > (trunk, when there's a 2.0 branch). I love the idea, I think think it's >> > > reasonable, but I think it's too late to go in v2.0. Otherwise, this >> > > will be >> > > bad for PRs. >> >> > > Cheers, >> >> > > =Gustavo >> >> > > On Tuesday March 17, 2009 19:05:50 Mark Ramm wrote: >> > >> Works for me. We can try to shoehorn this into rc1 if we can get it >> > >> done in the next day or so -- otherwise it'll be a 2.1 feature. >> >> > >> I want it done now, but making that happen will require updating >> > >> several docs :/ So, I'm a bit hesitant to about just going for it >> > >> directly. >> >> > >> --Mark Ramm >> >> > >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Florent Aide <florent.a...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > >> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 4:56 PM, percious <ch...@percious.com> wrote: >> > >> >> I have begun work on our new extensions methodology. (Some call this >> > >> >> component architecture). I am working with Jorge and Jon to try and >> >> > >> > [...] >> >> > >> >> websetup/ >> > >> >> __init__.py : contains setup_app which will be a combination of >> > >> >> bootstrap and schema setup >> >> > >> > nice this will definitely make things easier. >> >> > >> > Florent. >> >> > > -- >> > > Gustavo Narea <xri://=Gustavo>. >> > > | Tech blog: =Gustavo/(+blog)/tech ~ About me: =Gustavo/about | >> >> > -- >> > Mark Ramm-Christensen >> > email: mark at compoundthinking dot com >> > blog:www.compoundthinking.com/blog > > > -- Mark Ramm-Christensen email: mark at compoundthinking dot com blog: www.compoundthinking.com/blog --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears Trunk" group. To post to this group, send email to turbogears-trunk@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to turbogears-trunk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-trunk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
