[Bese-devel] New patches to parenscript: 1-Aug-2007

[Attila Lendvai]

> > Is there any particular reason to not porting UCW to the new upstream
> > parenscript?  I think we should abandon parenscript at the UCW

lack of time. i've spent about half an hour and rolled it back. but
it's probably easier now, because the new repo became much more
friendly to old code with some recent changes.

> > repository and with abandon I mean completely remove it.  Or, at
> > least, rename it to something like parenscript-ucw.
>
> I don't agree, since darcs is a distributed version controlling
> system, why can't there be different repos? Having to keep your code
> in sync with a development repo that is changing often can be a big
> pain.

well, yes and no. i like that aspect of darcs, but the current
parenscript repo in ucw got separate from the new one, because there
were so many restructuring changes in the new repo that you can't pull
stuff between them.

but ucw _may_ need a branch that follows the official repo only in
leaps. it's a similar problem we have with dojo, where the answer was
'yes', because it's so tightly integrated that i've decided to put
dojo under the ucw repo, so you always get the dojo version which is
working fine with ucw.

-- 
 attila