Incorporating new changes (was Re: 3.9alpha update stream)

Andreas Raab andreas.raab at
Wed Jul 6 06:21:49 UTC 2005

> But some of the core packages haven't really been properly detangled
> yet, so we may have a lot of changes which cut across several packages. 

I agree. Better package separation is probably the most important thing 
to do right now - simply because otherwise you'll end up with 
inappropriate changes to (say) Kernel because of some Morphic change. It 
would be nice if package boundaries could be defined in such a way that 
we know and can proove the package dependencies and use that as a guide 
line for how to set up the boundaries.

> Maybe these core packages (Kernel, Collections, Morphic, etc) should be
> maintained in the 39a repository for the short term until they are
> better detangled.  Certainly the detangling work itself will definitely
> cut across multiple packages and would be easier to do directly in the
> 39a repository.  (Although the work of the Morphic Splitters team is
> obviously relevant here, I'll have to see what progress they made.) 
> Comments from Daniel and any other detangling experts? :)

Keep in mind that MC is fairly good at merging (and where it isn't it 
needs fixing ;-) so we ought to be able to take the results of various 
projects and simply merge them in.

> Actually, both the Morphic Splitters and the Toolbuilder work involve
> some detangling, and we'd probably want to look at incorporating both of
> those earlier rather than later.  (At a certain point we just have to
> pick which order these are incorporated... e.g. 1. Morphic Splitters  2.
> Toolbuilder refactoring  3. previous 3.9alpha changes... whichever goes
> first has the least amount of merging to do.)

As far as I can tell 1. and 2. don't overlap at all (Brian could say 
more about this). 3. should probably go last since it has the finest 
granularity and therefore is easiest to merge.

   - Andreas

More information about the Packages mailing list