On 18/05/07, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As it turned out, we didn't talk about the artifact resolution
mechanism in great detail. Jason told us he is working on a paper to
describe how it might be re-implemented in 2.1.
Jason, any chance you could push what you have into SVN so we can
provide some feedback and see how it might line up with Mark's work?
If it is compatible, and the patch is good, then we could apply that
to trunk now.
Either way, I don't think applying this on 2.0.x is a good move. We
have to draw the line about new features getting added there.
I'd like to reach a consensus on whether we can include MNG-612 in
2.0.8. It's currently scheduled for 2.1.x, which means that it will
be superseded by the dependency graph code we've been discussing on
another thread. It's also a long way off, since this is still in the
specification stage and no code has been committed yet.
The patch attached to MNG-612 works with the current 2.0.x
architecture and simply makes the conflict resolver pluggable, rather
than hardcoded as it is now. This issue has 13 votes which, if
targeted for 2.0.x, would make it the third most voted for issue for
2.0.x. Seeing as the patch is pretty non-destructive and the work is
ready to go, are there any good reasons to veto MNG-612 being included
in 2.0.8?
Cheers,
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
