[Chandler-dev] Branching for recurrence/table view interactions?
john at osafoundation.org
Tue Nov 28 11:45:47 PST 2006
On Nov 28, 2006, at 11:05 AM, Jeffrey Harris wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I'm not crystal clear on whether this requires any group process,
> but I
> figure it's better to discuss branching, at least briefly, so people
> don't get surprised by it.
> I knew my table/recurrence work was going to slow things down, but
> apparently it also caused a few test failures that weren't just
> related, so I backed out my changes. Since it seems like the
> impact of
> those changes is likely to be mitigated by work Grant's doing,
> Grant and
> I have been discussing working together on a recurrence branch.
> Grant would put his per-attribute-modifications work (which is mostly
> working except for indexes) onto the branch, and I'd put in my
> modifications-in-the-dashboard work. This would give me a chance to
> A) consolidate triageStatus modifications, which should limit the
> performance hit from my work, and
> B) change the export/share code to ignore triageStatus-only
> modifications, avoiding sharing pollution my change was likely to
> Anyone have objections or concerns with this plan? Historically it
> seems like merging branches back in has been fairly difficult, so I
> think it would be naive to assume this time around we won't have
> problems. Still, I think this would be the right move.
Since the switch to svn I've had little trouble dealing with branches.
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
> Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
More information about the chandler-dev