-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 313
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
adopt pull-requests fom vis and timeline-plus #36
Comments
#5 is ready to go. |
As far as I see it we now can go two directions now: Just merge #5 and hope that everything works and things generally improve.
We merge all vis and timeline-plus pull requests one by oneThe idea is to merge (cherry-pick) every PR from vis and timeline-plus one by one. While merging we could have a look at the [merge-timeline-plus branch] to see how things should look in the end.
Hey everybody! What do you think? |
I personally like the idea more to merge every PR seperatly and test and release often. We did the same thing in vis-network and it worked out fine. We would very much rely on the [merge-timeline-plus branch] that @yotamberk created to see how things should look in the end. This work was NOT in vane! I also could live with just merging #5 and make a v6 release. This would basically mean a break with the old git-history and an new start. It depends if you folks want to see this library progress more fast or more stable! I don't want to decide this! |
I agree with @mojoaxel that merging in increments will be more stable but I also think that if major features are missing in Also, I ran a smoke-test of I haven't been able to test @yotamberk merges but b/c of exporting issues but I see that this repo does not include Typescript typings |
As a user I'd be happy with a major v6 release that merged As a maintainer even if you do 5-6 cherry picked PR's an hour when there's 60+ that still a lot of time to ask that could be spent elsewhere. The layers of sediment for viewing would still exist in an archived repo when needed. |
Hey guys, I know it's not ideal, but I recommend the first option. It will allow me and the community to pursue the work on this module without opting out to use timeline-plus. |
@yotamberk I'm going you fully support your decision as the main maintainer of this library! |
While @yotamberk is working on #5 i thought I could start adopting pull-requests from vis one by one:
...
yotamberk/timeline-plus#37
yotamberk/timeline-plus#36
yotamberk/timeline-plus#16
yotamberk/timeline-plus#15
yotamberk/timeline-plus#12
yotamberk/timeline-plus#3
yotamberk/timeline-plus#1
pointer-events: none
for read-only timeline items almende/vis#4285order
definition almende/vis#4091The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: