| 1 |
On Friday 16 March 2007 18:58, Luca Barbato wrote: |
| 2 |
> Jason Stubbs wrote: |
| 3 |
> > That's not entirely true. The main trouble with refactoring portage code |
| 4 |
> > is that there is no defined public API and so even the littlest changes |
| 5 |
> > are likely to break things in gentoolkit and several of the portage gui |
| 6 |
> > front end packages. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> What about branching, doing the dirty stuff and let others fix their code? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
I've worked on a branch in the past as has Brian and a lot of the code that |
| 11 |
went into 2.1.0 was done in a seperate branch. However, a lot of bugs that got |
| 12 |
fixed in the release branch never got fixed in the development branches and |
| 13 |
so switching wasn't really viable. For 2.1.0, a lot of the work that was done |
| 14 |
ended up being completely redone in the release branch. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
In hindsight, if the team had have worked together as a team on a dev branch |
| 17 |
and only critical bug fixes went into the release branch while the dev branch |
| 18 |
was being readied it would have worked. Proper coordination would be needed |
| 19 |
but I guess it still could... |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Jason Stubbs |
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives