Nik Clayton wrote:
> What's missing is:
> a) Updated documentation that shows (1) how to call all the methods that
> were previously wrapped using named parameters (the old positional
> parameter calling mechanism still works), (2) new documentation for all
> the methods that have been wrapped that weren't previously wrapped.
> b) Tests that cover the new methods.
> Note also that the methods wrapped are those that were in svnclient when
> the branch was cut, and won't include (yet) any that have been newly added.
> I suspect that planning to merge this back for 1.5.0 is probably a bad
> idea, given the amount of work involved in (a) and (b) above (it's not
> difficult work, it's just that there's quite a lot of it). If there was
> going to a be 1.5.1 for (say) around June then that's probably much more
Since we don't know when 1.5.0 is going to be cut, I'm going to proceed
on working on a(2) now. If we can document the newly wrapped methods,
even if we don't fully document/test the named parameter calling style,
then we are ahead of the game. Tests of a(2) then become the next
priority. I don't want to get into a situation where the new Perl
bindings work becomes blocked for 1.5.1 because /nothing/ was added in
1.5.0. If there isn't a problem with the bindings work going into 1.5.1
instead, then I'm more than happy to wait.
> There are a handful of bug reports about the Perl bindings, where people
> have submitted patches to wrap specific new functions. I haven't
> reviewed them in detail, but they're good candidates for 1.5.0.
I can also finish up the work on these (since I already applied those to
the branch before I went missing). It's Spring Break next week, so if I
can find a quiet spot, I can bang out some POD pretty quickly.
Director of Information Research and Technology
Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group
4501 Forbes Boulevard
Lanham, MD 20706
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Wed Mar 28 17:11:14 2007