On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 16:10, Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Stefan Küng <tortoisesvn_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 03.05.2011 23:53, Greg Stein wrote:
>>>> I suggest (1). Fix issue 3865 with a new WC API to normalize targets,
>>>> by higher levels. That API would follow the 3-step process described at
>>>> end of the issue description.
>> You both suggest to postpone the case-only-rename as well as issue
>> 3865 (with a new case-normalizing WC API) to 1.8+, right? Fine for me,
>> just trying to make sure I understand correctly.
> I think that the new API could be done whenever you would like. But I
> worry that you could get everything revamped in time for 1.7. I have a
> sneaky feeling that there will be edge cases around how we probe into
> the filesystem that will need to be corrected. Thus... it feels like
> 1.8 would be when the *complete* solution arrives. If you start
> working on it now... I see no particular reason to try and tell you
> what to do (unless your work blocks a 1.7 release; then I would try to
> dissuade you :-) ).
> For example, in the very early stages of wc-ng, I did a lot of work in
> streamlining APIs within wc, in advance prep for the bulk of wc-ng.
> That streamlining went out in 1.6. After the 1.6 branch, then we
> really started working in earnest on wc-ng. ... Similarly, you might
> find some early work that can be started that won't disrupt the 1.7
Yes, I share your concern that it might be difficult to get this
finished in time for 1.7. Especially given that I'm not too familiar
with the wc layer etc. I could spend _some_ time on it, but it
wouldn't be very predictable, and I'd certainly need someone
guiding/mentoring me, to look over my shoulder. I have the feeling not
a lot of people have the cycles available for that right now ...
Soooo, I think I'll let this rest for now. Maybe it's something to
look at during the hackathon in Berlin, but we'll see ...
If someone else wants to dive in :-) ... go ahead.
Received on 2011-05-08 23:34:58 CEST