> From a personal point of view I practically never look at source code
> history, other than immediate history (that is the bit of history I've
> I personally find that there is no point in looking at history to
> understand a bit of code, whether it is to fix a bug or implement a
> new feature.
"That sounds like you do not expect other developers to analyze or even
contribute to the core"
Actually my expectation is not that people don't look at the core, but
that people don't look at the history.
>From a personal point of view I practically never look at source code
history, other than
As of today, the TiddlyWiki core (v2.6.2) is lagging two releases behind
jQuery (v1.4.3 vs. v1.5.0), with jQuery 1.5 being a major release.
Late last year, there seemed to be universal agreement that core
development should move more rapidly and be more responsive.
Unfortunately, I don't see any e
> One of the reasons I'm in favour of not importing the history into git
> is that a clean repository is in some ways attractive to new users.
> I'm in particular thinking of a friend of Paul's who was interested in
> doing some work on TiddlyWiki, but didn't bother in the end because
> the reposit
As I understood it, Eric did not want the history to be discarded, and
that criterion is satisfied by keeping the frozen svn repository.
One of the reasons I'm in favour of not importing the history into git
is that a clean repository is in some ways attractive to new users.
I'm in particular thin
On Mon, 7 Feb 2011, Martin Budden wrote:
However for the main body of TiddlyWiki, I thought we'd decided *not*
to import the history. That's certainly my preference. I'm willing to
be persuaded otherwise, if people feel it is important that we import
the history, but I'd like that to be made as
> To get things started I went ahead and today created a cooker repo
> and imported the existing cooker "stuff" into it.
Looks good - thanks Chris!
> Presumably a next step with cook and ginsu would be to package them
> in a proper Ruby way
+1
> I thought we'd decided *not* to import the histo
I notice that, by svn2git, you've also imported the history. Cook is
small enough that it does not really matter if you import the history
or not.
However for the main body of TiddlyWiki, I thought we'd decided *not*
to import the history. That's certainly my preference. I'm willing to
be persuade
On Jan 20, 5:34 pm, FND wrote:
> Off the top of my head, I can think of these basic/official components:
> * TiddlyWiki core (Trunk/core/, along with tests and such)
> * Cook (Trunk/tools/cooker/)
> * jQuery plugins (Trunk/core/jquery/plugins/)
To get things started I went ahead and today created
