On Wed, 2003-10-29 at 03:43, Bryce Harrington wrote:
Since we cannot distribute a forked Sodipodi under the same name, I think we're going to need to rebrand it. It's logical to rebrand it as 'inkscape' since that will be the name of the project.
The next question we face is how to get from Point A to Point B. Knowing this will help determine what to call your codebase.
I can easily see us slip into [rewriting from scratch] with Inkscape, but feel strongly that [reworking the existing codebase], while less glamorous, would be much more likely to succeed.
That's been my experience as well, although it can really suck for prototyping -- especially with things like some of the radical UI changes that I have in mind.
Your advice is well-taken, anyway.
So... here's what I'm thinking at this point...
* Sodipodi fork becomes the 'inkscape' module
* My sketch becomes ... 'experimental', maybe?
* I think our first tasks in inkscape should be:
1. Getting it building with a C++ compiler
2. Fixing the remaining XML compliance bugs
3. Removing the hacked-in Qt stuff
4. Cut a release
* While I'm wrangling patches on the inkscape side, I will keep attacking the prototyping/experimental side of things (along with anyone else who's interested). Eventually, depending on how they converge, we might start seeing code being merged both ways.
* At that point we may want to think about cutting an 'inkscape2' module based more on one side or the other, depending on how each have matured. It'll be an opportunity to lose any vestiges of the old Sodipodi directory structure, which I'm not particularly fond of, anyway.
How does that sound?
-mental