Re: [cclib-devel] branch maintenance

[Noel O'B. <bao...@gm...>]

The orca branch should have been deleted after the merge...back in 2007!
:-) I'll do this.

For the others - well, once they're ready, they should go on the trunk too.
If you've put some work into a parser, it's worth finishing it up, and
getting it onto trunk. If they stay out on the branch, they will gradually
bitrot....

- Noel

On 23 April 2012 16:18, Adam Tenderholt <ate...@gm...> wrote:

> I'm in favor of deleting the Orca branch, although maybe Noel wants to
> weigh in. (cc'ing cclib-dev.)
>
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 11:48 PM, Karol M. Langner
> <kar...@gm...> wrote:
> > So, do we delete the orcaparser, or somehow mark it is inactive? What is
> our policy for branches?
> >
> > - Karol
> >
> > On Apr 19 2012, Karol M. Langner wrote:
> >> I also think we should merge only after a parser is reasonably mature,
> >> for instance when most of the standard unit tests run and there are
> only a few errors.
> >>
> >> On Apr 19 2012, Adam Tenderholt wrote:
> >> > Ah, good catch. I didn't even think of checking trunk to see if the
> >> > Orca parser had been merged after that feature request a few days ago.
> >> > I just assumed they had downloaded cclib and didn't have Orca support.
> >> > I wonder why they submitted that feature request.
> >> >
> >> > For the other branches, do we want to merge them into trunk if they
> >> > aren't ready? I recall that NWChem was nowhere near ready, and when I
> >> > went to work on it last year, I wasn't able to get it to print some
> >> > attribute cleanly (running in parallel causes duplication of output
> >> > sometimes). It seems like we should wait until they are more fully
> >> > supported.
> >> >
> >> > Adam
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Karol M. Langner
> >> > <kar...@gm...> wrote:
> >> > > From what I can see, the ORCA parser was alraedy merged into trunk.
> >> > >
> >> > > If there is nothing new there (I've looked only at the parser
> source), then I think
> >> > > the branch should be deleted, or marked somehow as inactive.
> >> > >
> >> > > As far as I can see, the other parse branches (Molcas, NWChem,
> Turbomole) have
> >> > > not been merged into trunk yet.
> >> > >
> >> > > Karol
> >> > >
> >> > > On Apr 19 2012, Adam Tenderholt wrote:
> >> > >> With the recent talk about updating the license of cclib, it got me
> >> > >> thinking that we might need to perform some maintenance on the
> >> > >> branches since several are quite old (e.g. Orca). Is it best to
> make
> >> > >> sure the new parsers in those branches are well-supported, and then
> >> > >> merge those changes into trunk? Or should we merge trunk into those
> >> > >> branches?
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Adam
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.
> >> > >> Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.
> >> > >> Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE!
> >> > >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2
> >> > >> _______________________________________________
> >> > >> cclib-devel mailing list
> >> > >> ccl...@li...
> >> > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cclib-devel
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > written by Karol Langner
> >> > > Thu Apr 19 18:39:04 CEST 2012
> >>
> >> --
> >> written by Karol Langner
> >> Thu Apr 19 19:04:09 CEST 2012
> >
> > --
> > written by Karol Langner
> > Mon Apr 23 08:47:36 CEST 2012
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.
> Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.
> Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2
> _______________________________________________
> cclib-devel mailing list
> ccl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cclib-devel
>