Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2006/06/11/20:53:01
Hi.
> I've been working on that in my miniscule amounts of remaining free
> time.
> Most of the issues are just warnings (specifically type-punning).
> Cutting -Werror from the CLFAGS did the job, at least temporarily.
> I don't like to ignore warnings, but I had to bypass them somehow
> and still keep the code in a recognizable state (mainly for diff).
> Non-warnings were bypassed by actually fixing the code.
This looks like a possible duplication of effort, or am I wrong? Have you
two exchanged patches (although DJ probably commits directly to core)?
> I estimate option 2 will require a day a week of someone's time for two
> to three months -- maybe more. 50% of this time will be "unproductive"
> in the sense of dealing with mail, getting information on issues,
> rebuilding things.
> Any volunteers?
Would it really be a day a week for months like you say?
1) The core has not changed much in last several months, so regular
re-compilations of the toolchain unneccessary
2) Email? What Email? What if the RM 'has no email' :))
3) At this point half a job is better than no job at all (i.e. current
status). The emphasis should be on familiarity with the issues and the
team that has volunteered to work on them. There *is* obviously *some*
efforts made on individual basis here. What is needed is some project
management and visibility.
4) IMHO The project status page needs to be moved back to delorie.com. It
is too confusing for the remaining userbase to deal with different sites
on the same topic that claim to be 'official' but display
conflicting/outdated status infos. Perhaps a user account can be set up on
that server for an additional volunteer, just to maintain the area in
discussion here.
An alternative would be to move the whole thing to sourceforge. They
provide mirrors, canned issue trackers, management infrastructure and CVS.
I know that wouldn't be 'delorie' any more, but it *might* be the better
solution long-term for others to contribute piecemeal (in some aspect) to
the project without the disjointed structure evident now. Just a thought.
Still no specific feedback on those "show stoppers" for the 2.04 release
(besides the somewhat-or-completely[?] resolved gcc4.x portability
issues). Hmmmm....
I hope this email wasn't too long :-D
Regards to all,
Ben
-----------------------------------------
Stay ahead of the information curve.
Receive MCAD news and jobs on your desktop daily.
Subscribe today to the MCAD CafeNews newsletter.
[ http://www10.mcadcafe.com/nl/newsletter_subscribe.php ]
It's informative and essential.
- Raw text -