> So - if you want your patches taken seriously, treat them seriously - > don't just write them, test them too (and not just a token test either > - REALLY test them). Especially when the testing framework is already > in place for something like template tags. I don't dispute the concept here, but it would help to have a django-testing document. I'm new to python (as are a lot of django-ers, I gather), so a hit-the-ground-running overview of the django test suite would allow me to make more meaningful contributions.
There's a high barrier to entry when I have to deconstruct the test architecture before I can contribute a simple patch. If you have any recommendations of where I can look, I'm willing to learn... but I as with most developers, time is scarce. > This isn't in dispute. Adrian has decreed that #648 is rejected. It > wasn't because it was hard to implement. Check the mailing list > archives for the discussion that occurred when ticket #648 was > rejected for the reasoning behind the decision. Fair enough (though I obviously don't agree with the decision). I just saw that Adrian had made a few modifications to the ticket after it had already been closed. --Ben --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
