Confusion about use of G2

[Derek Atkins]

Quoting Chris Shoemaker <c.shoemaker at cox.net>:

>> I think it should be committed, disabled (maybe debug-enabled), and
>> picked up after G2/2.0.
>
> I'm fine with this.  I'll provide instructions for those brave testers
> to re-enable in the alpha releases.

My personal feeling is that if the code is there and working now then
we might as well just commit it now..

>> > I haven't removed all use of FreqSpec.  Recurrence covers a broader
>> > concept than FreqSpec. (start date)  IMO, Recurrence is what FreqSpec
>> > should've been.  I think Josh agrees.
>>
>> The goal has always been to have these two systems use the same
>> mechanism.  I do agree that Recurrence should replace FreqSpec.
>>
>>
>> > Converting SX to use Recurrence would make for cleaner code, (IMO) a
>> > nicer GUI, and remove at least 2 bugs(*).  But, I think that's too big
>> > a job for G2 and also too big to block budgets for.  I also think it's
>> > better done incrementally.
>>
>> (Assuming budgets are in 2.0, which I don't think they should be...) I'd
>> be fine if both FreqSpec and Recurrence are in the code at the commit,
>> and frankly even at the release.  Ideally, though, the concepts merge
>> ASAP, and certainly not past the following release.  I'm happy to handle
>> the SX side of the switch (as I generally need to cleanup the SX code),
>> but I'm not going to do that until after 2.0.
>
> Agreed on all counts.

IMNSHO, if you want to commit the new budget code before 2.0, I think that
the FS/Recurrence code needs to be merged before 2.0 as well.  Personally
I'd prefer if your initial patches already had them merged....

> -chris

-derek

-- 
       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available