Re: [OctDev] Functions in the core

[Thorsten Meyer]

Jaroslav Hajek wrote:
> 
> Maybe we differ slightly in the view of the development archive. IMO
> these are just patches that can easily be reverted. I didn't even yet
> add the functions to the build process, so that they won't be
> installed if someone uses a snapshot - they're just there for
> development testing. So I don't really regard my act as true addition.
> The discussion you call for has just started :)
> 
> I don't basically object to a policy that the main archive should be
> regarded as a more sacred place. But as I have explained earlier, IMO
> this significantly clashes with the policy of having a linear archive,
> which makes parallel development for a longer time quite difficult.
> So, if that's going to happen, I think we should allow merges. I'll
> then happily use my experimental repo for most of my development.
> For instance, I've added a couple of new functions (and extended some)
> without discussing with anyone, mostly for use in other functions. I
> hope this is OK, at least nobody complained. Anyone is certainly free
> to raise objections to any of my patches.
> 
I think we should really come to a common understanding about how the
development archive is meant to be used and how "sacred" it is.

About sacredness: the faster the development of octave advances and the more
contributors we have, I think, the more difficult it will get the avoid that
experimental, uncomplete or inconsistent changes accumulate in the development
archive. Once this happens, it could be quite tedious (and not much fun at all)
to clean it up again. So I personally would prefer to have clear and rather
strict rules about what is allowed to go into the development archive.

About merges: I don't think that I fully understand what this issue is about,
mostly because I don't have any experience with merging large development trees.
Only, I keep reading that distributed version control systems like mercurial
make merging much less painful than with older tools. Anyway, this seems to be
about how the development archive can be kept "clean" while at the same time not
hindering the development of exciting new features and performance improvements
in octave too much. So what's the best tradeoff between those two aims?

regards

Thorsten