On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 08:47:39PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Tue, Oct 07, 2003 at 09:48:05AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > > [cut] > > * A version of the Windows installer that supports both Prod and Devl > > modes which the user can choose between on installation (ideally with > > a nice check box on the installation wizard, not one of those ugly > > modal dialog boxes which we need to get rid of). > > [cut] > > As jrand0m suggested: > "Since only developers will use the dev network, the installers should > point at the prod network files with developers downloading the jar > directly." So no installer change might be needed.
Okay, this raises directly my main objection to the whole scheme. If only developers use the developer network, the developer network will be so small that there will be no need for routing, and it will not be a useful simulation. The basic problem we have been having is that the stable branch does not work. If the stable branch worked, I would be able to commit disruptive changes to the unstable branch without exploding the list. As it is, I should have tested the changes on a local test network before committing them (not like anyone else here does). The solution is to debug the unstable branch, and get it good enough to merge. If people want to set up an independant network that uses prehistoric builds, that's fine, but if everyone uses them, I don't see how we can possibly move forward, for the reasons I just outlined. > > mids > -- > PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xF19326A9 > Key fingerprint = 730D 9B3A F406 F28A 957D 6397 31E8 6D4C F193 26A9 -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
