Hello Stepan, I'm gratefull for your interest to this patch. > why did you remove logging for "date-of-creation" and > "authors" field?
I believe these fields are now excessive. A date of creation may be got from svn as well as an author. I was not a supporter or author removal idea because svn lists only committers, but this was accepted anyway, and now we should to follow. I agree that obsolete warnings may be removed by decreasing logging level, but this is not a correct way to follow to my personal point of view. > Is is necessary for p-unit integration? I guess no - > you can change logging level (or fix tests description files) to avoid > unwanted logging. And you are correct. It is not necessary for p-unit integration. The goal is not p-unit integration at all. The goal is adding new tests and integrating them seamlessly, and absence of obsolete warnings is important for seamless integration. Thanks! On 10/29/07, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10/26/07, Alexei Fedotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Stepan, sure. Thank you for your interest to this patch. > > > > For reviewer convinience the harness patch is split into two: > > Harmony-style formatting changes were separated from removing two > > warning outputs and authorship [1]. While I respect a contribution of > > Andrey Tyuryushkin, I have learned the the author removal trick from > > Sveta. > > > > Alexei, > > Thanks for providing new patch that free from formatting changes - > that made the review easier. Now I have a question to your updates to > the harness: why did you remove logging for "date-of-creation" and > "authors" field? Is is necessary for p-unit integration? I guess no - > you can change logging level (or fix tests description files) to avoid > unwanted logging. > > Thanks, > Stepan. > > > Thanks. > > > > [1] > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12368462/harness_review.patch > > <SNIP> > -- With best regards, Alexei, ESSD, Intel
