[Opensim-dev] Status of presence refactor?

[Frisby, Adam]

I would like to start the SOP refactor fairly soon - what if once 0.7 is tagged for the RC process; I go and and make a new branch; we can sic testers on the presence-branch, while dev happens on the branch I tag?

Adam

> -----Original Message-----
> From: opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev-
> bounces at lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Justin Clark-Casey
> Sent: Friday, 19 February 2010 3:25 PM
> To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Status of presence refactor?
> 
> Melanie wrote:
> >
> > I would not like to see the refactor start in the branch, because
> > that would postpone a merge indefinitely.
> 
> Yes, please whatever happens, do not start any sog refactoring in
> Master until presence-refactor has been merged and we've started a
> branch for 0.7.
> 
> In fact, when presence-refactor is merged with Master I think that we
> should wait at least 2 weeks before branching for 0.7 in order for all
> active developers to iron out any significant bugs associated with the
> merge.
> 
> At a minimum, the 0.7 branch itself would be subject to the same
> release candidate and bug triage procedure as was 0.6.8.  Only after
> this would 0.7 be tagged.  I think that this is the very minimum we
> need to do in order to be a credible project.
> 
> This would also give us an opportunity to get the documentation into a
> shape where at least super-intelligent pandimensional mice can
> understand it :)
> 
> At the same time as 0.7 is branched, I also think that it would be
> prudent to branch for a potential 0.7.0.1.  If all goes well with the
> sog refactor this will never see the light of day.  But I think we
> should give ourselves a means of working with the old sog code in case
> the refactor encounters trouble.  The sog refactor is far from trivial.
> 
> >
> > However, the refactor caould be started in a NEW branch that is
> > based off the current presence-refactor. The friends and SQLite
> > functionality could be merged back to that new branch when they are
> > completed. Git allows this easily.
> 
> That sounds like a good idea.
> 
> >
> > Melanie
> >
> >
> > diva at metaverseink.com wrote:
> >> I could, but I'm hesitant to make diva distro releases from branches
> >> that aren't the master branch. Plus, so far the differences between
> the
> >> two branches are purely internal; there is no functional difference,
> or
> >> new bug fixes, or anything like that. The new architecture will
> allow
> >> for lots of exciting things to happen, but, again, I'm hesitant in
> >> making them happen in the branch. I'd rather merge this to master.
> >>
> >>
> >> Robert Martin wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:15 AM,  <diva at metaverseink.com> wrote:
> >>>> Sigh.
> >>>> It's ready. It's been fully operational for several weeks, modulo
> >>>> buglets. It hasn't been merged because the SQLite connector hasn't
> been
> >>>> redone and at least Melanie doesn't want to merge without it.
> >>>>
> >>> could you release a copy of Diva with the updated code (since Diva
> of
> >>> course does not use SQlite)?
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Opensim-dev mailing list
> >> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
> >>
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Opensim-dev mailing list
> > Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Justin Clark-Casey (justincc)
> http://justincc.org
> http://twitter.com/justincc
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev