On Tuesday, November 27, 2007, at 03:25PM, "Craig Berry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On Tuesday, November 27, 2007, at 11:48AM, "Rafael Garcia-Suarez" <[EMAIL >PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Note also: we have a couple of patches pending by John Malmberg, one to >>cwd.t and one to File::Spec::VMS (if I don't forget any). I think I may >>apply them to bleadperl then, if noone objects. > >Fine by me. As I recall they were pretty short and sweet, so even if they >cause trouble it will only be on VMS and quickly identifiable. > >>It's a bit unfortunate that we have two repositories for PathTools, with >>patches going sometimes in one, sometimes in another. We have then to >>merge diffs in both directions. In my opinion, PathTools is too >>entangled to the core to be developed separately, so I think that the >>bleadperl repository should be considered the master one, and the svn >>repository should be used mostly for convenience and local branches. > >I agree with the downside of the way we do it now. The upside
Gah. Silly webmail inteface cut me off in mid-sentence. I was just going to say I think Ken has done a good job of working toward consistency across platforms and the size of the differences is an indication good things have been going on with File::Spec, but we are at a bad time to be that far out of synch. Not sure yet how exactly git will help but I hope it does.
