Well, since this is a template only change, you can make the change
after quickstart and never "install" 2.1 and there are several issues
that go into a feature freeze:

1) potential for breaking things
2) need to rewrite docs
3) need for public blog posts, articles, etc to work with the released version

And I put them in the order of imporance I think they have.   But I do
think that making the code in a python magazine article "just work" is
worth the trouble of 2.0 users having to split this apart manually.  I
know that sucks a little bit for pages, but the bad marketing of
having a magazine article go to thousands of people with code that
does not work out of the box is worse.

And from Gustavo's message I assume that he had people put extra
bootstrap data into websetup.py and showed that in the article --
which is what would be broken by chris's change.

--Mark

On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Jorge Vargas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Gustavo Narea <[email protected]> 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 think you missed the point either here or of feature freeze. if the
> API is keep intact (which from talking to precious) I believe it was.
> then the change can go into the feature freeze and nothing should
> break. And it is not a big problem. This isn't really a new feature is
> spliting it in half. And making the old one call the 2 new ones. It's
> more like refractoring and the first rule of refractoring is that you
> should not break anything.
>
>> 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).
>>
> again that is not feature freeze it's just code cleanup, this is as
> harmless as splitting a file in two
>
>> 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.
>>
>
> Right I do agree with you on this, but from Chris commit history I
> think we can all agree he has never broken the trunk.
>
>> 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.
>>
>
> So the final decision on this is to keep it out? because that just
> threw a snowball on me.
>
> In order to get started with the new turbogears.org we need pages 0.1
> released which now depends on this, which means we need TG2.1 which is
> unreleased, which means I need to either break the security policy of
> the server (installing unreleased software) or install a hacked
> version of TG2.0rc1 in order to get this going.
>
> And as I said above this is all api stable, nothing will break with
> the FIRST stage of the changes (needed for pages) the second set of
> changes should be 2.1 only.
>
> my 2 cents
>
>> 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 <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 4:56 PM, percious <[email protected]> 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

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TurboGears Trunk" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-trunk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to