incubator-clerezza-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tsuyoshi Ito <tsuy....@trialox.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Accept the proposed patch of CLEREZZA-540
Date Wed, 01 Jun 2011 05:48:42 GMT
Hi Reto

Thank you for the detailed explanations.

Cheers
Tsuy


On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 2:08 AM, Reto Bachmann-Gmuer
<reto.bachmann@trialox.org> wrote:
> On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 8:16 PM, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>wrote:
>
>>
>> On 28 May 2011, at 08:55, Tsuyoshi Ito wrote:
>>
>> > Dear all
>> >
>> > If no existing API will be changed:
>>
>> Well the closing of 540 would also officially close 544 (which is still
>> closed waiting for 540 to be closed
>> even though officially this is not a legal Apache maneuvre).
>
> No, CLEREZZA-544 is not closed. I explained why I already committed code for
> that issue. But closing the issue this thread is about, would not prevent
> you from vetoing against 544.
>
>
>> And 544 does changes quite an important api.
>>
> It adds a method, it doesn't change neither signature nor behaviour.
>
>>
>> It adds a new method to CallbackRenderer
>>
>>  public void render(UriRef resource, GraphNode context, String mode,
>>                     OutputStream os) throws IOException;
>>
>> I am not against such an addition were it not for the way GraphNodeProvider
>> is implemented currently.
>>
>
> [...]
>
>>
>>
>> Now this means that the GraphNodeProvider is not just a package for some of
>> Reto's pet projects, but
>> will be central to the working of Clerezza.  In which case the issue of the
>> efficiency of it and the
>> decisions it makes on what is authoritative should be considered more
>> intently it seems to me.
>>
> I think that the Trunk is not a place for Pet projects anyway.
>
> Reto
>

Mime
View raw message