Confusion about use of G2

[Derek Atkins]

Quoting Josh Sled <jsled at asynchronous.org>:

> On Fri, 2005-10-07 at 16:42 -0400, Josh Sled wrote:
>> (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.
>
> Eh, sorry; strike the parenthetical in the first line, but I do assert
> the rest.

I'm not at all comfortable with both FreqSpec and Recurrence being in the
code at releasetime.  My reasoning:  Datastore issues.  We should have
one and only one storage schema for the FS/Rec concept.  My hesitancy
for commiting without the merge is that it reduces the "fire" to merge
them.  If the code wont be committed without the merge then it provides
more incentive to merge them..   Maybe I'm cynical.

-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