I know I am a newcomer to this list, but here is my perspective:
- It seems like a good idea to remove the unicode changes and start
patching bug fixes and small feature requests. Make the current
version of rdiff-backup as bug-free and stable as possible, as soon as
possible, in its
current manifestation, but do not do any kind of major overhaul. Would
this be the 1.4.x branch?
- It also seems like Daniel has a good jump-start on a better code
base, albeit with BC issues. Python has come a long way since this
project was started and it seems reasonable to conclude that starting
from scratch with a heavy emphasis on testing will produce a cleaner
more maintainable code base. Would
this be the 2.0.x branch?
This gives current and new users confidence that the project is still
alive and committed to the current user base. But it also gives hope
for a better implementation to come.
I would also recommend that someone be nominated the benevolent
dictator, stressing benevolent of course, but at the end of the day,
someone needs to be able to make the call on hard decisions. Nothing
kills a project faster than lack of leadership.
Looking forward to progress,
--------------------------------------
Randy Syring
Intelicom
502-644-4776
"Whether, then, you eat or drink or
whatever you do, do all to the glory
of God." 1 Cor 10:31
Josh Nisly wrote:
Development on rdiff-backup has stagnated for
the last while. I think that this is attributable to several reasons:
* Andrew has dropped of the face of the earth, (he's working on
graduate studies, IIRC) and I've been busy with other things. Since
we're the two core maintainers, that tends to slow things down.
* I started work on unicode support, but realized that it requires a
transition period. In current CVS, it's broken just enough to make life
difficult.
* The code isn't structured all that well. This is at least partially
because we don't have good automated tests, so it's hard to refactor
without breaking things.
* We're still using CVS :-)
I propose that we, at least for now, pull the Unicode changes out of
CVS. This is unfortunate for a number of reasons, but hopefully we can
bring back in transition code that will make full support possible.
Additionally, we need to develop a comprehensive test suite that runs
on all supported platforms. Code changes should be accompanied by tests.
Once the unicode changes are pulled back out, I've a fair number of
patches sitting in my own queue that can go in.
Feedback is welcome,
Josh Nisly
_______________________________________________
rdiff-backup-users mailing list at address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/rdiff-backup-users
Wiki URL: http://rdiff-backup.solutionsfirst.com.au/index.php/RdiffBackupWiki
|