[Uml-devel] redesign et al

[Andrew Sutton]

On Thursday 14 November 2002 5:12 pm, Sebastian Stein wrote:
> Jonathan Riddell <jr at jriddell.org> [021114 22:50]:
> > it will take some time.  I'm wondering if, after the 1.1 release, we need
> > a 1.2 branch for adding obvious features to the current code base and
> > tidying it up, and a 2.0 branch for the big redesign.
> >
> > Depending on timeing a 1.2 branch could be what goes into KDE 3.2 with a
> > 2.0 branch just using the Sourceforge CVS.
>
> I don't know at the moment if we need a 1.2 branch, but first we really
> need a 2.0 branch. And we should go on to make bug fix releases of 1.1 so
> lets say 1.1.1, 1.1.2... If we really add significant new features to 1.1
> or we can backport some of the ideas from 2.0, we could open a 1.2 branch.
> But first I would suggest to have a 1.1.x and a 2.0 branch.

i agree. there really isn't much to put in the 2.0 branch - i mean, i guess we 
could include the standards, the xml and any other related design documents, 
but other than that, we don't have much - not even the structure of the 
project. we're close to something, but not really final.

i haven't had much chance to work on my reflective design for a little while. 
i've been kind of consumed by homework and research. anyway, its my hope that 
by monday, i'll have some kind of concrete design in place - maybe even some 
code to implement it :)

actually, i'll say that for certain. by monday, i'll have most of the 
reflective design finished, plus an outlline of the source code and an 
implementation of primitive types based on the reflective stuff. then we'll 
have something for 2.0 pending acceptance, of course.

andy