While ultimately related, I apologise for "kind of / sot of"
hijacking the thread.
On 22/07/2009, at 06:19 , Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> On Jul 21, 2009, at 12:25 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> Hey all,
>> Over the past couple months, I haven't had a chance to work on wc-ng
>> due to travel and getting married and whatnot. Hyrum has been pulling
>> all the weight of wc-ng lately. But I'm trying to dig back in and
>> continue pushing it forward.
>> Right now, two of the big goals in the work are:
>> 1) remove all usage of svn_wc_entry_t
>> 2) remove all usage of svn_wc_adm_access_t
> Getting rid of the adm_access batons and entry_t usages is fairly
> straightforward at this point, and lends itself to a hight degree of
> parallelization. I'd like to see as many people as possible get
> involved. It would help get people aware of the wc_db APIs, and also
> help us get to 1.7 sooner.
Is any of this work "relatively" simple?
Ultimately, I'm asking if there is a low enough barrier to allow non-
committers (well perhaps its more along the lines of non-technically
aware people - as opposed to the "rights" of commit or otherwise) the
ability to help here at any level?
>> Part of the reason that I'm writing this is to discuss whether that
>> timeframe works. We had a sorta goal of "6 month release cycle", but
>> this would be about 9 months.
>> Thoughts? Concerns?
I realise that my opinion doesn't necessarily carry a lot of weight in
the overall scheme of things (being relatively new and ignorant to the
history of the project and certainly ignorant technically) - but none
As an end-user, I'd much rather see point releases that address known
show-stopper bugs and allow wc-ng the appropriate time for release -
certainly more so than anyone feeling "pressured" into releasing it in
any set timeframe.
I'm not saying we shouldn't have goals / or a plan... but since the
wc-ng is an architectural change surely, (rational-thinking) people
aren't going to get annoyed that the community's self-imposed release
cycle isn't strictly followed.
1.5 with its merge / re-integration changes was another such large
project whereby the release was longer than expected. But I most
certainly appreciate the functionality it has brought to SVN for me to
And I don't presume that there is any such "scope" - but if there are
simple changes that could be done by "anyone" - how many people are
there lurking on the mailing lists, thinking,
"I wish I could so something to help. Almost anything.
But the time requirements to reach the appropriate technical knowledge
to place me in a position to be genuinely helpful as opposed to
consuming more time way from the project that I produce for it - is
simply just too great."
I don't have an answer - and there may well not even be one - but I'd
certainly volunteer for any task that doesn't have a massive technical
Received on 2009-07-22 02:11:36 CEST