Re: [fluid-dev] The 1.1.0 milestone

[Josh Green]

Hello David,

On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 18:06 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
> > With all this big changes and new plans, I'm wondering where does lie
> > the 2.0 branch? I could have done some work these holidays but I have
> > the feeling that we're diverging and I prefer to wait for the water to
> > calm down. Before starting this branch I was like one year reading the
> > list and I knew about the development status of FS, and the Miguel's
> > fork. Nowadays I see people jumping in with his own ideas but without
> > knowing much of what has been talked here lately.
> 
> Being one of the people "jumping in", I don't know much about Miguel's
> fork/branch or the 2.0 branch. That's why I asked for some pointers, so
> I don't have to read an entire year of messages. What I'm looking for
> the answer to is why all of you decided to branch instead of doing code
> cleanup one piece at a time, into the stable branch. I'm sure you had
> good reasons for doing so, I just don't see them.
> 


I think a lot of this confusion has been due to lack of direction.  The
upside of all of it, is that it can help to better define the direction.
I'm beginning to agree with your statement above, that we can do code
cleanup one piece at a time, with the current 1.x and at some point make
a 2.0, when the API itself seems too restrictive.


> > I think I will stop my activity from now on until I see where FS is
> > heading and how. I don't want to spend more time on it until it has a
> > clear route and better organization. Since some things that were planned
> > for 2.0 are now included in the 1.1.0 plan and others are going on a
> > tangent, I think it's time to talk about it all.
> 
> How is the 2.0 branch doing currently? What has been done and what
> remains? Perhaps there are parts that can be merged already?
> 


Fortunately this discussion is happening fairly early in the process and
it was just recently branched.  Bernat has invested some time and
thought into it though, but I hope he can apply that to 1.1.0.


> // David
> 

Best regards,
        Josh