I think that's a good idea. Having a new package under the normal src directory in master with some sort of feature toggle I think would be good and would be easier for some to help test or contribute.
With this work and with jigsaw coming it would be nice to release a 2.5 and get master on a path to 3.0. On Sunday, August 7, 2016, Jochen Theodorou <blackd...@gmx.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > As I was posting almost a year ago in http://blackdragsview.blogspot.de/2015/03/thoughts-about-new-meta-class-system.html I had some thoughts about possible migration paths from old MOP to new MOP... and continued thinking about this. > > Since this will take several normal releases I think just using a branch will not do here. Because keeping them just in sync will probably take up most of the time I would normally use to implement this. So I was wondering... would you guys ok with me introducing classes marked as "experimental" on the normal branch? > > I was thinking initially about adding a new source folder where these classes go and let us then omit them during release. But I think this will not work. There will be circular references. There have to if the new MOPs are supposed to work together somehow. So I guess it would be just the normal src folder then? > > Or is someone having a better idea? > > bye Jochen >
