>> > - Migrate Trac and SVN to new server >> >> Why is this necessary? Can't the 1.x branch stay where it is currently? > > It's just a new machine, the structure would remain the same. Further > SVN reorganization is another matter to be dicussed separately (e.g. > what should happen with the currently orphaned trunk?) > >> > - Revive turbogears-trunk and make distinction between users and >> > development mailing list clear. >> >> What exactly needs revival? turbogears-trunk is alive and well AFAIK. > > I don't think so. I have often posted questions or tried to discuss > sth on turbogears-trunk in the past months and didn't get any answers > or very little feedback. I get the impression that many devs do not > even read turbogears-trunk properly anymore. I also think we should > make a clear distinction between the main list for *users* of > TurboGears (i.e. people developing *with* TG) and turbogears-trunk for > TG developers (i.e. people developing/contributing *to* TG). It would > be better, IMHO, if the lists where called "turbogears-users" and > "turbogears-devel", but it would not be practical to change this at > this stage. > >> Or you mean an ML that is dedicated to the 1.x branch? > > That's another matter to consider. Should we have seperate mailing > lists for TG1 and TG2? for the moment, i think not. But we should > evaluate this again in a few months. > >> > - Commit to 1.5 branch and back-port to 1.1 branch >> >> I'd say once 1.5 is out 1.1 users should be encouraged to migrate to >> it. Back-porting things is a pain... > > I just meant to say, that commits should go to the TG 1.5 branch by > default now. But we need to maintain the 1.1 branch for a while, since > CP3 will introduce some changes, which makes porting your apps a > little bit more involved than a 1.0 -> 1.1 migration. > >> > - Only backport to 1.0 branch if *really* necessary (ticket required). >> >> I'd say this shouldn't happen and if people are made understand that >> this indeed is not a priority people will either be happy with the >> current 1.0 or migrate to 1.5 (once it's out). > > Yep, this is really only for important bug-fixes and security issues. > That's why there needs to be a ticket for every commit to the 1.0 > branch, so the importance of the patch can be evaluated. > >> > - deprecate scheduler package >> >> Oh wait! And what should we use instead? > > It will be an external project. See my recent post on the trunk ml on > this topic (you DO read the trunk ml, do you? ;) ).
Yep, I did read that post :) It was not clear from the item 'deprecate scheduler package' that you simply mean to replace the shipped tg scheduler module with this external one. This change would of course be fine! Cheers, Daniel -- Psss, psss, put it down! - http://www.cafepress.com/putitdown --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
