Re: [naviserver-devel] Wich source to start from, 4.0 or 4.1?

[Zoran V. <zv...@ar...>]

On Friday 11 February 2005 07:01, Stephen Deasey wrote:
> Hmm, I don't know that it would be the best idea to start with what I
> (or Vlad) has.  My repo is aolserver-HEAD as of a few months ago,
> before the last set of major changes.
> 
> I'd rather split my stuff up and submit it separately, have you guys
> look it over before I apply it.  I'm sure there are errors you will
> spot and improvements you will suggest.  And I don't think it will be
> too hard to do.
> 
> Also, I might re-evaluate some of my decisions.  Obviously, when it's
> just for yourself you can be a little looser in how you do certain
> things, change APIs etc., because you know all the callers of the code
> or can decide that you're happy with the disruption it might cause.  I
> haven't done anything drastic!  But still, I'd want to be a little
> more careful and, the tracker provides a nice paper trail.

Good. So we could start with what is in the cvs for 4.0 now. 
I've checked out the 40_r10 out of CVS. I can import this clean,
rewind the ChangeLog and start from there. 

Here some rought guidelines we should follow
(feel free to change and/or add your own)

Any functional-level changes should be posted as RFE's and we should 
all agree on them before we apply them to the codebase.
Bugs we discover should be tracked in our bugbase and fixed accordingly.
It would be nice if we can post a bug-report to AS project as well.

Functional chages applied to the aolserver pendant project are to
be discussed between us shortly and then we can decide if this 
is something we might need to have or not.
Bugfixes applied to the aolserver pendant project could/should be
also fixed here. I think we all can share this work on as-can
basis.  

This is fair for the begining, I suppose. Later on, if we get more
people on the wagon, we can always work-out some other procedure.

Regarding CVS import: should I import the 4.0.10 state?

Cheers,
Zoran