On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Anoop Nayak <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Joe, Brane, > > > I just made a draft of the proposal as per the format suggested by > Luciano in the following links: > > <link removed> > > I have a child page listed in the second link. And I have uploaded the > contents of the draft of the proposal contents onto a temporary server > which i just registered now. > > <link removed> > > Please do have a look and advice. > > And the last 2 mails were rejected. I clearly don't know the reason. > Please do help me find that too. > > Thanks in advance, > > -- > Anoop > One thing comes to mind, though I can't say whether it needs to be covered in the scope of your proposal. The Trac wiki syntax has been extended over the past several releases and will continue to be extended (for example [1]). In order to keep your library maintainable, it will be important to have good test coverage of your JavaScript code. Neither Trac nor Bloodhound currently have any test coverage of JavaScript code. It would be desirable to have unit and functional test coverage for your project. Since this may involve adding a third-party library to your project, this is something you'll want to discuss on the mailing list with the other Bloodhound devs early on, in anticipation that the third-party libraries you choose could eventually be used more widely within the Bloodhound project. I don't have any experience with unit or functional testing in JavaScript, but I expect that other Bloodhound devs will have some good suggestions. There are some brief suggestions on functional testing libraries by one of the Trac devs in [2]. [1] trac.edgewall.org/ticket/9037 [2] trac.edgewall.org/ticket/11014#comment:3
