commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Craig R. McClanahan" <>
Subject Re: [digester] plugins patch - how best to post for review?
Date Fri, 26 Mar 2004 21:45:44 GMT
Quoting Simon Kitching <>:

> Hi,
> I've got a significant patch ready for Digester's plugins module.
> It refactors the existing code that currently locates the dynamic rules
> for a plugin into a Strategy pattern with a number of predefined
> strategies matching the old code.
> The patch also fixes a number of outstanding issues, particularly to do
> with hard-wired xml attribute names.
> I'm wondering what the best thing to do with all this is.
> Posting the diffs to the list will be real ugly. 
> As I'm the only developer currently working on the plugins stuff, and it
> has never been in an official release, I think it might be easiest if I
> just define a tag (so we have a point of comparison and a rollback
> option) then commit my changes to the plugins package. Is this ok with
> everyone? If so, any suggestions on tag naming?
> I'm still a few days away from being ready 100% ready, so no rush..
> Regards,
> Simon


Your best bet would be a branch, not just a tag.  That way, you can do the
development in parallel on your branch, and we can (if we like it at the end)
merge into the HEAD when we're satisfied.  Robert is doing something similar on

As for a name, something like "DIGESTER_PLUGIN_REFACTORING_BRANCH" or something
would be good -- it includes both the name of the component the branch is for
(since we all share the same repository) and makes it clear that this is a
branch tag, not just a marker tag.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message