These are chat archives for shaarli/Shaarli

Feb 2015
Feb 28 2015 09:05

I don't have the time..

@nicolasdanelon Sorry to hear that :P I said several times a rewrite was not to be expected; and I was not interested in refactoring for the sake of refactoring. We are still unsure whether we will merge #108 (what does it bring to the table?), that's why it is marked decision needed. And if you read the comments you'll see that it still has problems (no proper upgrade path for libs), so it is not mergeable in the current form anyway.

What are the "Project" or "Product" Scope ?
What do you mean?
What's the link between shaarli/Shaarli#89 and refactoring?
Nicolas Danelon
Feb 28 2015 23:27
I bring to the table the pull #108 cause is a big deal about 'refactor' or solve issues of the original shaarli.
Nicolas Danelon
Feb 28 2015 23:33
issue #89 has nothing to do with refactor :) was just a suggestion :P