Sidney Markowitz writes: > > I think that should cut down on the danger of test rules getting > > published when we don't want that to happen. > > I agree. I also assumed that the sandbox was set up like that until I > had occasion to run some test rules. Your proposal makes the whole > process take fewer steps as well as being fail-safe -- There's no need > to remember to use special names or flags when you are first creating a > test rule, and just the step of adding one flag when you are ready to > publish.
Yep, that's the idea. I forgot to mention an additional detail though -- if a publishable meta rule relies on a testing subrule, it'd have to bring in the subrule into the publishable set. (That's what the current code does now anyway, so there isn't much change in that regard) --j.
