Do we have an idea about when we want to get out with a 2.1.5? I'm half done in the process of completing coding targets for 2.2, still missing some love to TW2 support and then it's all documentation. It would probably be good to get out with 2.1.5 some time before we release 2.2, otherwise it might obviously cause some confusion due to the big changes between the two.
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Alessandro Molina <[email protected]> wrote: > I created the 215 branch cherry-picking all the commits that I think > should go into 215 release. > > Merging the branch made me notice just one issue, for future commits > please remember to split feature/bugfix commits from pure syntax > rearrangement/cleanup ones. I had a very hard time at cherry-picking > the template rendering params commit due to many syntax changes that > were not related to the feature itself and were not applicable to 215 > as it doesn't have crank. Having them separated from the feature > itself would have made me possible to cherry-pick only the feature and > leave the crank code syntax changes on the other branch. > > Also do we really want to enforce 80 cols PEP8 limit? I usually find > impossible to read 80cols python code and nowadays it is usually > possible to put two windows side by side even with a 110/120cols > limit. If you prefer to strictly follow PEP8 I'll adapt, but I really > think that the 80cols limit hurts a lot readability. > > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 5:36 AM, Michael Pedersen <[email protected]> > wrote: >> I just checked, and I see 2.7, but no 2.5. I'll have to look into making >> that available somehow, or get Luke to do so. Another task for the list for >> this weekend, I think. >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Christoph Zwerschke <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> That would still a special branch, even when made only at relase time. I >>> think it's better to have an branch existing all the time, and whenever we >>> feel a bug needs to be backported, we can add it to that branch at any time, >>> without immediately making a bugfix release. >> >> >> I was going to argue against this, and then I realized that would be >> foolish. However, I will still branch from the 2.1.4 tag. That seems to be >> the most logical place to start the branch-2.1 line. >> >> -- >> Michael J. Pedersen >> My Online Resume: http://www.icelus.org/ -- Google+ http://plus.ly/pedersen >> Google Talk: [email protected] -- Twitter: pedersentg >> >> -- >> 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. -- 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.
