Re: superunstable

From: Mike Schrag (mschra..dimension.com)
Date: Mon Feb 11 2008 - 23:56:01 EST

  • Next message: Timo Hoepfner: "Re: superunstable"

    >>> I'm sort of in a holding pattern and having second thoughts ... If
    >>> I commit, I also commit myself to a lot of work, because the ant
    >>> build portion is most likely going to break in a lot of funky
    >>> cases (who knows what people do in those ant files). I don't know
    >>> if I want to deal with it right now, so I'm just putting it off.
    >>> I'm thinking about just fixing a couple of the notable regressions
    >>> in the current one -- the double selection of local + system
    >>> frameworks, the P/Whatever error during conversion, and the unique
    >>> framework bug -- which incidentally only doesn't happen to me
    >>> because I have a custom NSBundle that works around that problem.
    >>
    >> I like the idea of fixing these before going to completely new
    >> problems. Because the ones you mentioned are annoying (I stumble
    >> over them a lot at the moment, because I have to make so many
    >> changes here and there).
    >
    > +1
    >
    > Yeah, and this can be aimed at a new stable soon enough. I am keen
    > for the shake-up, but this seems like a sensible move prior to that.
    OK ... Here's what I'm proposing -- Comments welcome:

    Already done:
    * I just saved out patches for all my previous changes and I'm now
    rolled back to the current unstable trunk

    Proposal:
    * Fix these handful of regressions that showed up in 3.3 (listed above)
    * 3.3.2 is supposed to be out by the end of Feb, at which point we
    declare the unstable branch "stable"
    * Once we are declare stable on 3.3.2, I will modify my original
    classpath management code to use the CURRENT ant build system but with
    the NEW eclipse classpath management (= ant.* stays around, but
    management is much nicer and more fine-grain within Eclipse) and I'll
    commit that
    * After the inside-eclipse classpath system is tested and approved,
    that will move to the "stable"
    * After that moves to stable, the new ant build changes will go in
    * After the new ant build changes are stabilized, it will go to "stable"
    * After that, possibly a bug bash? Vote for your most hated bugs,
    etc. I'd also really like to clean up the "zero state" of WO
    development -- smoothing the process for people just starting with WO
    development (I think this ultimately will help everyone by tightening
    the UI) -- if you have specific ideas for this, log them.
    * Back to new stuff?

    ms



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Feb 12 2008 - 00:29:44 EST