On 9/5/07, Gerrit Renker <gerrit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > | Agree. But don't think this is an obstacle to merging as we are > | running obsolete code in other branch/mainline ;-) > | > That is not what I meant. Of course it is not an obstacle of getting code `in', but the > problem is in getting the code `out' or updated when there is time for a new revision. > > When there is little or no documentation in the code saying which variable or piece of > code belongs where, then each time someone wants to change a bit of code has to reverse- > engineer what actually is going on. This can be very time-consuming. So I was not thinking > in terms of merging (although I am sure that Arnaldo will pick out bad code), but of keeping > the code changeable for a longer period and easier to update. > > Don't get me wrong, I don't mean your code here, it is a general problem which I think we > should pay more attention to. And, as said, my ideas of keeping things separate may not be > the best possible solution, only one that I could think of at the moment. > Aha. I see what you mean now. I think the best thing to do here is to label each block of code introduced, that is specific to a version, with the version of the document used. I actually think my code could be merged into your main branch (when I resubmit it fixed) as it does not conflict with anything and doesn't run by default. > > | > * the CCID3 code is currently facing the following revisions > | > - the current code implements rev00 > | > - Tommi's CCID4 relies on rev01 (not sure about Leandro's) > | > - your FR code actually would need rev02 > | > - rev02 is in the process of being revised and obsoleted into rev03 > | > > | Agree all the versions are a mess. I think it's worthwhile starting on > | upgrading the code base but not a project I'm undertaking at the > | moment (or you). > Hopefully there will be some IETF consolidation about rfc3448bis in December, then all this > could be reduced to one revision. > > Imagine -- 4 different developers and 3 different draft versions :( > I'm in two minds about this one. On my one hand as Linux developer I think we should always be working towards the latest version. On the other hand as a researcher I want a known and consistent quantity. Difficult one to resolve! Ian -- Web1: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4/ Web2: http://www.jandi.co.nz Blog: http://iansblog.jandi.co.nz - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
