After a big review of the code, I think it would be better to do it in a branch and rewrite each part one by one to clean correctly all the code.
Emmanuel On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Wendy Smoak <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not likely to be the one doing most of the work, and it doesn't > really look like we'll have competing branches that we'll have to > decide between, so it's fine with me. :) > > Re: the problem of merging to trunk... I don't see that happening. If > a branch shapes up to be Continuum 2.0, I'd expect that we just _move_ > it to trunk. > > But again if those that are doing the work want to do it on "trunk" > rather than "continuum-NEXT", go for it! They're all just directories > in Subversion that can be moved around at any time we decide to. > > -- > Wendy > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 8:20 AM, Emmanuel > Venisse<[email protected]> wrote: > > I'd prefer to decide what will be Continuum 2.0. I won't like to start to > > work on a new architecture if we aren't sure because we'll spend lot of > time > > to write a POC, so personnaly, I'd prefer to start directly in trunk. > ... >
