| 1 |
On Fri, 2013-10-11 at 12:28 -0700, Matt Turner wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Brian Dolbec <dolsen@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> > This is only |
| 5 |
> > good for running the code directly from the git checkout. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> actually seems useful. We've had clearly broken commits go upstream, |
| 8 |
> and if the author had been able to test from a git checkout we |
| 9 |
> probably could have avoided that. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Which is why I made the rewrite code able to run from the checkout fully |
| 12 |
and properly. Just cd into the directory, run "source ./testpath" and |
| 13 |
it's will run completely from the checkout. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> What I mean is that I don't want to turn down contributions from new |
| 17 |
> developers because there's a big backlog of work that hasn't gone |
| 18 |
> upstream. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I don't want to discourage others either. It is just much better to |
| 22 |
encourage some help on the rewrite in my opinion. Especially since |
| 23 |
patches 2 & 3 have already been done in the rewrite branch. Some of |
| 24 |
patch 4 might have been done already, but likely not all. If the |
| 25 |
rewrite is to take over from the master branch... |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
The rewrite is not far from being able to take over as master. There |
| 28 |
are a few rebase errors in the rewrite-on-master you did. There is some |
| 29 |
cleanup work to do on the autoresume operation. Then a little more |
| 30 |
testing with the tree defaults relocated to ensure I haven't missed any |
| 31 |
hard coding. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
The default tree location move is waiting on the catalyst rewrite code |
| 34 |
to go live producing stages, etc.. |
Archives