On Feb 25, 2008, at 21:56, Clint Webb wrote:

Its gonna make for a messy patch set though. Not sure how to handle putting all this back into the binary branch. I might see if I can separate all my changes into different groups of patch-files to make these changes a bit at a time.

        Yes, less is good.

I haven't yet completed the work though. Given that I can only spare a little time here and there to work on it, I'd say it will be a few days before I have anything I can send back for others to try out.

It seems that the general way to do this is to git-svn clone the tree and build a local branch of binary and commit your patches there. If you can do that and share the tree, that'd be a great start.

Of course, I don't think we're in the market for a new protocol, but it sounds like you're doing some further decoupling than I've done and will likely get the codebase cleaner.

I am also adding a simple benchmarking tool to make sure that I haven't made things worse.


        Excellent.  This is much needed.

--
Dustin Sallings



Reply via email to