On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 02:40:19PM -, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
> This list would make a good addition to one of the cpython development
> pages. If potential contributors could find this information, then
> they'd be much more likely to participate by doing reviews.
If anyone want
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 27/04/10 17:16, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> It would be kind of cool if there were some best practices for running said
> unittest both with and without the patch enabled. Kind of like using #ifdefs
> in C but without all the commenting-out-commenting-in
Ezio Melotti wrote:
> When I'm writing the patch it's usually easy, I write the tests, see
> that they fail, write the fix, see that they pass.
> When I'm reviewing the patch, I apply the patch, see that the tests
> pass, svn revert the fix, check that they fail.
> Most of the patches affect just a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> Hmm, it feels exactly the other way around to me: working with the DVCS
>> tools while reviewiing a patch allows me to be more productive (e.g.,
>> using 'bzr shelve' or the equivalent hg subcommand).
>
> Just try using Subv
> Hmm, it feels exactly the other way around to me: working with the DVCS
> tools while reviewiing a patch allows me to be more productive (e.g.,
> using 'bzr shelve' or the equivalent hg subcommand).
Just try using Subversion for some time again, and you'll see that it is
not difficult at all. S
On Apr 27, 2010, at 02:37 PM, Tres Seaver wrote:
>You can always "shelve" the part of the patch which isn't the test: I
>do that pretty frequently in the Zope tree, where I am now doing most
>development with bzr.
Yes definitely. bzr-loom just makes that much easier to manage.
-Barry
signatu
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 03:23:19PM -0400, Tres Seaver wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > Tres Seaver palladion.com> writes:
> >> This is an excellent set of guidelines. The only drawback I see here is
> >> that the current VCS situation makes d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Tres Seaver palladion.com> writes:
>> This is an excellent set of guidelines. The only drawback I see here is
>> that the current VCS situation makes doing the review more tedious than
>> it should be, especially for non-commi
Tres Seaver palladion.com> writes:
>
> This is an excellent set of guidelines. The only drawback I see here is
> that the current VCS situation makes doing the review more tedious than
> it should be, especially for non-committers. Or maybe the Hg mirrors
> are truly up-to-date and working? La
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Apr 27, 2010, at 02:40 PM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
>
>> On 01:38 pm, rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
>
>>>2) have unit tests that fail before the patch and succeed after
>> This list would make a good addition to on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
R. David Murray wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:15:49 +1000, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> No, of course not. There are always other reasons, the biggest is too
>> many things to do and not enough time to do it. If I did review
>> patches, would they
On Apr 27, 2010, at 11:43 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
>I wonder if it would be better to encourage people to post the unit
>tests and the fix as separate patch files.
I think this is not bad idea for larger fixes, where it's not trivial to
manually edit the diff.
-Barry
signature.asc
Descriptio
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Apr 27, 2010, at 02:40 PM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
>
> >On 01:38 pm, rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
>
> >>2) have unit tests that fail before the patch and succeed after
> >
> >This list would make a good addition to one of the
On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:16:51 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> It would be kind of cool if there were some best practices for running said
> unittest both with and without the patch enabled. Kind of like using #ifdefs
> in C but without all the commenting-out-commenting-in error proneness. I
> guess
On Apr 27, 2010, at 02:40 PM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
>On 01:38 pm, rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
>>2) have unit tests that fail before the patch and succeed after
>
>This list would make a good addition to one of the cpython development
>pages. If potential contributors could find
On 01:38 pm, rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:15:49 +1000, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
No, of course not. There are always other reasons, the biggest is too
many things to do and not enough time to do it. If I did review
patches, would they be accepted on the strength on my untrus
On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 11:15:49 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> No, of course not. There are always other reasons, the biggest is too
> many things to do and not enough time to do it. If I did review
> patches, would they be accepted on the strength on my untrusted
> reviews?
It is very very help
17 matches
Mail list logo
