Of course, but given that none exist and it's up to be released, some kind of compromise has to be made.
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Eric Sandall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Friday, March 28 2008 08:39:16 Nathan Ingersoll wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 9:56 AM, The Rasterman Carsten Haitzler > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I repeat what i said on irc, but unit tests are really needed for eet > > > > and its future changes > > > > > > sure, but not needed for a 1.0.0 :) > > > > I agree for the alpha and beta releases, but it would be really nice > > to have unit tests for the final 1.0.0 release. It can help catch > > compatibility issues much earlier in the process. > > Unit tests should be used throughout the process to catch issues *before* you > release, not after. > > -sandalle > > -- > Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer > [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/ > http://eric.sandall.us/ | http://counter.li.org/ #196285 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. > It's the best place to buy or sell services for > just about anything Open Source. > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace > _______________________________________________ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
