Re: [server.trunk] modules/package refactoring UPDATE

2008-08-11 Thread Robert Burrell Donkin
On 8/12/08, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well done, and thanks for the clear update, this was good to read. :-) > i've just got the code and will have a look at it later, but it sounds > like a good job. +1 - Robert > > On 8/11/08, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Stefan

Re: [server.trunk] modules/package refactoring UPDATE

2008-08-11 Thread Danny Angus
Well done, and thanks for the clear update, this was good to read. :-) i've just got the code and will have a look at it later, but it sounds like a good job. On 8/11/08, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stefano Bagnara ha scritto: >> I completed my first step in "repackaging" and "rem

Re: [server.trunk] modules/package refactoring UPDATE

2008-08-11 Thread Stefano Bagnara
Stefano Bagnara ha scritto: I completed my first step in "repackaging" and "remoduling" server.trunk code. It is far from being perfect, but at least a first goal is achieved. Now no package belong to 2 modules considering -util, -api and -library modules. [...] The next steps (as soon as I fi

Re: [server.trunk] modules/package refactoring UPDATE

2008-08-11 Thread Robert Burrell Donkin
On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stefano Bagnara ha scritto: >> >> After I moved tests in the right places (excluding IMAP), I'd like to sort >> out a better structure for our modules. >> [...] >> I don't want to make a proposal for each change because i

[server.trunk] modules/package refactoring UPDATE

2008-08-10 Thread Stefano Bagnara
Stefano Bagnara ha scritto: After I moved tests in the right places (excluding IMAP), I'd like to sort out a better structure for our modules. [...] I don't want to make a proposal for each change because it would take too much time, and I cannot know what to propose until I put my hands on th