On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Yury V. Zaytsev <[email protected]> wrote:
> Does it mean that making the branches completely incompatible even in > terms of licensing is a good idea? Of course not, but the fact is that the two different branches are most likely not going to merge. For all you people wanting to change stuff in CF-linux: please do, try crazy stuff, go nuts. BUT! If you want to merge your stuff back to the mainline, please, do submit your stuff in small chunks. If you migrate too far from trunk and just dump a multi-thousand line diff or hundreds of commits to merge in bzr, your changes will most likely be ignored. Not because they are bad, or because I hate you personally, but because it is just too much work to review. > At the present time the refactoring code seems to compile on Windows / > MSVC, which is (if I'm not mistaken) not the case for the trunk. At the moment, yes. But there was a gap of about 500 commits or so where it did not work. I will not just take that diff and merge it as is (as discussed above) plus that would probably lead to conflict hell. Trunk does work with MinGW but not with MSVC (though it does compile). I believe this is due to renaming puma.dll to cuneiform.dll. The code does some magical dlopen stuff against itself and for reasons I don't understand or have time to find out, now fails on MSVC. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~cuneiform Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~cuneiform More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
