Re: [dev-serveez] progress to serveez-0.2

[Mike Gran]

> From: Raimund 'Raimi' Jacob <address@hidden>
> On 06/15/2012 11:25 PM, Raimund 'Raimi' Jacob wrote:
> After Julians comment, I had a look at both repositories and have to draw 
> this 
> Which means:
> 
> [serveez-mg] was not branched off the "official serveez git" but from 
> the last CVS version.
> 
> [serveez master] master was also branched off the last CVS version. [serveez 
> next] developed from there.
> 
> Unfortunately, this means that some obvious cleanup-actions have been made by 
> both Mike and TTN, but in a git-incompatible way.

True.  serveez-mg was just a hack, which I never really expected to get used
by anyone.  There are large commits that have no explanation of any kind.

> 
> Also, Mike has removed stuff that TTN has kept (and I would like to keep, 
> too). 
> And both have mangled *.am and the autotools stuff.

True.

One place where Serveez CVS shows its age is with its autotools functional and 
header
checks, some of which were to support quite ancient versions of C.  I went with 
the
presumption of Linux Standards Base (3.0?) and only kept autotools checks for 
those
function that didn't appear in LSB.  Not that I'm saying that Serveez official 
should
do that, but, some of those autotools checks that is does have are obsolete.

> And finally: Due to Mike adding his (C)-Strings and TTN changing the License 
> just about everything is being touched and in conflict. This is definitly no 
> fun 
> and no semi-automatic merge :)
> 
> So here is a possible solution: $someone looks at all of Mike's 123 commits 
> [0] and decides what is being manually (!) applied to serveez. During that 
> process $someone also has to keep in mind, what the core of Mike's work is. 
> IMHO:
> - guile 2.0 compatibility
> - autotools stuff (?)
> ...and what not to keep, IMHO:
> - removal of windoze stuff
> - removal of servers
> (with the notable exception of awcs-server, which has to die)
> 
> While I'm writing this, I just realized, that there is a mg/guil-2.0 branch 
> [1] which has only 20 commits and is not merged into master. Perhaps it's 
> enough to manual-merge/apply this stuff into serveez-next?
> 
> Mike, TTN, Julian: Would it be enough to merge/apply changes from mg's 
> "guile-2.0" and "gc-malloc" branches into serveez 
> "next" branch?
> 
> Mike: If that is not enough: Can you point out, which of your commits are 
> vital? 
> Perhaps cherrypick/rebase them in your repository so that $someone can 
> manual-merge/apply them over to serveez?

I'll see what I can do. I'll try to report back in a week or so.
 
-Mike