- From: Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
- Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 00:51:35 +0300
- To: QA-dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 19:10 +0900, olivier Thereaux wrote: > I am not sure I'd want to keep following the parallel RobotUA route, > in the light of the issues we've found in this module, as well as the > limited performance improvements. At least for now. I would like, > however, to make a few changes to the link checker, since at least as > a module/command-line tool it is still very useful. Agreed. > Among our options would be to: > - revert all parallelUA coding (but keep an archive somewhere of how > we would use it) > - put it in a branch (with the obvious risk that the branck will just > rot and die) > - ?? > > What do you think? I think a branch isn't necessary at the moment, it can be done later if needed. And CVS already archives stuff for us, the code can be always retrieved with "cvs diff -r 4.21 -r 4.24 checklink". So as far as I'm concerned, just reverting the stuff and proceeding from the 4.2.1 baseline would be ok.
Received on Wednesday, 26 April 2006 21:51:44 UTC