Luciano Resende wrote:
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 3:28 AM, ant elder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 10:33 PM, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
+1. Many of the items suggested for 2.0 have previously been the
> subject of discussions that have not been easy to close. Until
> we have agreement on how to approach these things, I think it's
> better for 2.0 development to happen in an "investigative" branch.
> Doing this will allow us to try different approaches and see
> which we prefer, without causing a lot of churn to the trunk.
>
So based on the comments so far I think we should hold off on moving to 2.0
for now.
+1, let's get consensus first.
That said I'm extremely wary of the having work going on in "investigative"
branches, given Tuscany's history of branches and forks I really really hope
this doesn't happen much and we'd instead all try to work together in the
trunk.
+1
...ant
After a week away I thought we'd have a clearer picture on this.
Yesterday I put together some improvements of the admin app and some of
the tutorial modules. I must say I'm a little lost now as to where I
should commit that stuff.
It's difficult to see where we are in this long thread. Is there a
consensus? Can somebody please summarize where we are?
Thanks.
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
