I could say yes, but I'd be lying. I'm certainly not volunteering anyone else for the work, just pointing out that we may want to make them a higher priority if we're doing a stable 1.0.0 release any time soon.
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 12:15 PM, The Rasterman Carsten Haitzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:39:16 -0500 "Nathan Ingersoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > babbled: > > > > > 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. > > going to write them all? :) > > > > -- > ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- > > > The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
