Re: GCC 4.1 Projects

[neroden at twcny dot rr dot com (Nathanael Nerode)]

Just to be clear, I do not want to criticize Mark or the Project system in
general.  I quite *like* the project sequencing idea.  I submitted the
libada-gnattools-branch project as two phases, and I think any major changes
from the second phase are perfectly suited to wait for stage 2.  Furthermore,
if there had been a major Ada or configury project lined up ahead of me, I
would have been willing to delay phase 1 on the grounds of possible genuine
merge conflicts (as opposed to the "phony" ones which make branch maintenance
such a pain).  I appreciate Mark Mitchell's work a great deal.

However, under the specific circumstances, I concluded that it was not
appropriate to delay commiting the ready and tested first phase of the
project.  It also makes any future merges so much easier it's not funny.

I do think certain types of janitorial projects should be given a higher
priority for merging, because of how annoying they are to maintain on
branches: specifically major rearrangement of code without intentional logic
changes, especially between files.  (This would be ameliorated for many cases
by a switch to SVN, of course.)  I found myself keeping *four* trees checked
out routinely in order to get the code movement right when merging.

-- 
This space intentionally left blank.