Hi Harbs, Looking forward to your changes. I'm just interested in release in whatever state it is and dealing with discussion later on.
Btw. I have invested also at least 6h with merge stuff and as you can see it end up with bigger things. Good Luck! :) Thanks, Piotr pon., 3 wrz 2018 o 09:18 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> napisał(a): > Right now, my priority is getting all three active branches combined with > all code working. That means MX/Spark, Jewel, and all the additions on the > revert branch all coexisting nicely in the merge branch. > > I’m spending the better part of today on that. > > I’d like to hold off on discussing where to go from here until I > understand the issues you went through with Jewel better. I expect I’m > going to go through a lot of the pain you already went through already > getting Jewel to compile and work with the merges. > > I might end up in the same place as you. Don’t know yet… > > I’m open to all possibilities. Even if we do separate depenendies, having > the dependencies even temporarily *might* help resolve some of the > underlying technical issues. > > Let’s discuss when I come up for air… ;-) > > Harbs > > > On Sep 3, 2018, at 9:17 AM, Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > considering making Jewel dependent on Basic. I'm trying to put my mind in > > that place. Since this is a huge effort for me, hope you all try to do > the > > same as me and considering some thoughts, so we can plan something that > > works for all: > > > > Since Basic will be the middle point between Core and Jewel, can we > > consider to move Basic CSS and TLCS to a BasicUI swc? So Basic could be > > really the common basic library and CSS doesn't mess Jewel things? > > > > If so, we can go that router and test and discuss that integration in a > > separate branch and deal with all of that. > > this will inevitably delay the release, but maybe is time to solve this > > first. > > > > One of the things to do in the final result is to compile Jewel (debug > and > > release) and comparte results on develop and results on integration > branch > > > > Then we can decide what's better and release that > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > El lun., 3 sept. 2018 a las 4:53, Alex Harui (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid > >) > > escribió: > > > >> FWIW, I agree with Harbs. Enough time has passed and changes have been > >> made that it is time to try making Jewel dependent on Basic so we can > see > >> in code (not words) what the problems are with doing that. > >> > >> My 2 cents, > >> -Alex > >> > > > > -- > > Carlos Rovira > > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > -- Piotr Zarzycki Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
