From dev-return-8294-apmail-continuum-dev-archive=continuum.apache.org@continuum.apache.org Thu Jul 02 11:29:45 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-continuum-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 28514 invoked from network); 2 Jul 2009 11:29:45 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Jul 2009 11:29:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 13662 invoked by uid 500); 2 Jul 2009 11:29:55 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-continuum-dev-archive@continuum.apache.org Received: (qmail 13577 invoked by uid 500); 2 Jul 2009 11:29:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@continuum.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@continuum.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@continuum.apache.org Received: (qmail 13565 invoked by uid 99); 2 Jul 2009 11:29:55 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:29:55 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of emmanuel.venisse@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.217 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.218.217] (HELO mail-bw0-f217.google.com) (209.85.218.217) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:29:47 +0000 Received: by bwz17 with SMTP id 17so369311bwz.2 for ; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 04:29:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=C/dqoK7p+x2viTN2f49LHZVeYrpxQzXwe+aC0T7XrY8=; b=uJhTuZnJO9Bl6vxZufOAzx5rH2IU7+Axr1ANupcRYHiyfIvx15xyQcLIvCPrSpT3KJ +O0tPdfAPQ7GvAmMwl6pwh1Dem0C3KF6rzoI3fQbRVz5mhye/lkQNTC2xXTGkNTbHTN2 GxC06ASYt9RxdLJHZ4sc80uktVFvjwoEyzkPg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=K2/R/TrD2LY8avCwv6Rf/CtgWB15oAO0nIhUgA3nfzdbC4Ug4p6mdeBATkafE+re9s WN2hKF9o5BMn3/ej1QMvkZxA61qmj/ziO8ommgsQRdQqz5Kl772eXWz6vzQyDoPWLYaT qDgzr3Vq+y0HMbxz06F4vze76MBBAaG/GcN9U= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.111.211 with SMTP id t19mr6968566fap.64.1246534165657; Thu, 02 Jul 2009 04:29:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <30235AE6-D328-4D15-8048-F249458ECE53@apache.org> References: <0B4BED0C-0418-4B85-8891-9F99C138DD56@apache.org> <30235AE6-D328-4D15-8048-F249458ECE53@apache.org> Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 13:29:25 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: separating the builder code from the UI From: Emmanuel Venisse To: dev@continuum.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d3766124fbf0046db75a2f X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --0016e6d3766124fbf0046db75a2f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm fine with your approach but I don't think the final code will be similar to the actual so I thought to write it from scratch. If we use your approach, it would be good to decide all modules and architecture components before to start so we'll can create an issue for each and follow easily the progress. On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Brett Porter wrote: > Do you mean start from scratch, or write one component and integrate it, > then write the next one, etc.? (That's more the approach I was trying with > continuum-scm since I got faster feedback, but I haven't been back to it in > a year) > > > On 02/07/2009, at 1:55 AM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote: > > After a big review of the code, I think it would be better to do it in a >> branch and rewrite each part one by one to clean correctly all the code. >> >> Emmanuel >> >> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote: >> >> I'm not likely to be the one doing most of the work, and it doesn't >>> really look like we'll have competing branches that we'll have to >>> decide between, so it's fine with me. :) >>> >>> Re: the problem of merging to trunk... I don't see that happening. If >>> a branch shapes up to be Continuum 2.0, I'd expect that we just _move_ >>> it to trunk. >>> >>> But again if those that are doing the work want to do it on "trunk" >>> rather than "continuum-NEXT", go for it! They're all just directories >>> in Subversion that can be moved around at any time we decide to. >>> >>> -- >>> Wendy >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Emmanuel >>> Venisse wrote: >>> >>>> I'd prefer to decide what will be Continuum 2.0. I won't like to start >>>> to >>>> work on a new architecture if we aren't sure because we'll spend lot of >>>> >>> time >>> >>>> to write a POC, so personnaly, I'd prefer to start directly in trunk. >>>> >>> ... >>> >>> > --0016e6d3766124fbf0046db75a2f--