Hans,
You have made a lot of commits to your development branch recently. Including updates to the third party tree. Do you have plans to merge these changes to the trunk?
Regards,
Tchavdar Roussanov
Hi Tchadvar,
I have moved all my projects to my development branch and I´d be interested in making that branch the new trunk. The problem I see is that some of the changes I made with respect to the XML generation are incompatible to the trunk version.
I´d propose the following: I will create a branch from the current trunk which is named "legacy" or some such and then move my development branch back to the trunk.
Let me know if that would work for you (and if anyone else reading this has any thoughts or objections, please shout!).
-Hans
On 10/24/06, Tchavdar Roussanov troussan@gmail.com wrote:
Hans,
You have made a lot of commits to your development branch recently. Including updates to the third party tree. Do you have plans to merge these changes to the trunk?
Regards,
Tchavdar Roussanov
bknr-devel mailing list bknr-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bknr-devel
Hi Hans,
It works for me. I didn't have time to work with bknr lately. I mostly use SBCL and in order to compile I have to update most of the third party libraries to their latest or cvs versions. I use a custom init.lisp that first check if I have the library in my asdf registry and only if it is not there pushes the thirdparty path into it. The biggest problem I have is with Portableaserve because it is not thread save with sbcl.
Tchavdar
On 10/24/06, Hans Huebner hans.huebner@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Tchadvar,
I have moved all my projects to my development branch and I´d be interested in making that branch the new trunk. The problem I see is that some of the changes I made with respect to the XML generation are incompatible to the trunk version.
I´d propose the following: I will create a branch from the current trunk which is named "legacy" or some such and then move my development branch back to the trunk.
Let me know if that would work for you (and if anyone else reading this has any thoughts or objections, please shout!).
-Hans
On 10/24/06, Tchavdar Roussanov troussan@gmail.com wrote:
Hans,
You have made a lot of commits to your development branch recently. Including updates to the third party tree. Do you have plans to merge
these
changes to the trunk?
Regards,
Tchavdar Roussanov
bknr-devel mailing list bknr-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bknr-devel
Hi Tchadvar,
I did merge back from branches/xml-class-rework to trunk. This includes the latest releases of the thirdparty packages as well as the current development version of the applications I presently support. I started cleaning up some of the cruft that is in the tree and unused since years, but there is still a lot to be desired.
About portableaserve: I am not interested in threading, so I have not followed what is needed to make paserve thread save. I've quickly checked the paserve ChangeLog and there seems to have been little activity. Is the latest CVS version any better? If it helps, I can try importing the last version into the thirdparty/ tree.
I have thought about removing thirdparty/ altogether, relying on asdf-install instead. My recent experience with various open source packages made me abandon that idea. I will continue to keep all packages that I depend on in the bknr repository and update that with recent releases of packages that are used. I also try contributing back fixes to thirdparty/ packages, but I have found trying that being pretty frustrating. Many authors do no longer use (and support) the packages they once wrote, and one can be lucky to get a response to a mail with a patch at all. I do like the idea of sharing, but I also like getting things done for my customers and it is frustrating enough having to spend much more time fixing bugs in software others wrote than on the application itself.
Sorry, I just had to write this down somewhere :)
-Hans
Yes, the open source world is not the ideal world.
On your question about portableserve the answer is yes, cvs version is better for me. The same is true for CXML.
Tchavdar
On 10/24/06, Hans Huebner hans.huebner@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Tchadvar,
I did merge back from branches/xml-class-rework to trunk. This includes the latest releases of the thirdparty packages as well as the current development version of the applications I presently support. I started cleaning up some of the cruft that is in the tree and unused since years, but there is still a lot to be desired.
About portableaserve: I am not interested in threading, so I have not followed what is needed to make paserve thread save. I've quickly checked the paserve ChangeLog and there seems to have been little activity. Is the latest CVS version any better? If it helps, I can try importing the last version into the thirdparty/ tree.
I have thought about removing thirdparty/ altogether, relying on asdf-install instead. My recent experience with various open source packages made me abandon that idea. I will continue to keep all packages that I depend on in the bknr repository and update that with recent releases of packages that are used. I also try contributing back fixes to thirdparty/ packages, but I have found trying that being pretty frustrating. Many authors do no longer use (and support) the packages they once wrote, and one can be lucky to get a response to a mail with a patch at all. I do like the idea of sharing, but I also like getting things done for my customers and it is frustrating enough having to spend much more time fixing bugs in software others wrote than on the application itself.
Sorry, I just had to write this down somewhere :)
-Hans
-
Hans Huebner -
Tchavdar Roussanov