On Thursday 07 December 2006 20:54, Melchior FRANZ wrote: > * Durk Talsma -- Thursday 07 December 2006 20:33: > > If AI really remains the only change, your solution might be workable, > > but the longer we keep a branched version, the more likely it becomes > > that there will be more data restructuring. And then we might regret the > > decision to have dumped the CVS PLIB base directory. So from that > > perspective, I'd still argue to keep it for a while, albeit with minimum > > maintenance. ;-) > > Yes, something like that. I don't want to "boycott" the PLIB > branch, but it has become very tedious to commit everything to > both. And when I tried to, I ran into files where others have only > committed to HEAD, and I would have had to decide whether *I* > wanted to sync them (no fun), or risk making a bigger mess. > > And that although several people already said that they use > the PLIB binary with HEAD data, which still works fine. (With > the exception of AI, maybe, but after all the tower.cxx crashes > I haven't used that much.) I'll continue to commit changes to > both source branches, as we still can't say for sure, from which > branch the next release will be made (or can we?). >
Agreed. Btw, with the additional explanation, your original mail starting this thread actually makes a lot more sense now. Thanks, :-) Cheers, Durk ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
