> How hard is it to refactor these 6 files so that all new code is in separate files from all preserved original code?
Will take a look at this today. On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 1:47 PM Beckerle, Mike < mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com> wrote: > How hard is it to refactor these 6 files so that all new code is in > separate files from all preserved original code? > > Assume one-liner changes to original files (like calling MockDebugger > changed to call DaffodilDebugger) are allowed. > > We either have to separate these 6 blended files, or convince legal and > the incubator-pmc that blended files are ok because they originally had the > MIT license. > > I definitely don't want to bother with that unless the refactoring > exercise here is hard. > ________________________________ > From: John Wass <jwa...@gmail.com> > Sent: Friday, September 10, 2021 1:02 PM > To: dev@daffodil.apache.org <dev@daffodil.apache.org> > Subject: Re: daffodil-vscode - how to package and identify the > contribution - some git questions > > Mike - Those were renames from the original versions that had "mock" in > their names. > > commit 383fd4882a8fe51adf21b5ae31fe252056800447 > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 12:54 PM Beckerle, Mike < > mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com> wrote: > > > > > John Wass said: > > > > I had a few more (6) source files as modified.. > > > > extension.ts > > debugAdapter.ts > > daffodilRuntime.ts > > daffodilDebug.ts > > adapter.test.ts > > activateDaffodilDebug.ts > > > > The 3 files with daffodil or Daffodil in their names, aren't those new > > files? Or were those based on provided files, but the file was renamed as > > well as the content modified? > > > > ...mikeb > > > > >
