> I have told that I want regression tests first and then patch.
Fine. Then if you don't have any patches to conflict with the ones that I
have, we might as well start with them. At least I won't be stepping on any
code you haven't already written. If you had written some there would be no
reason not to allow people to review thme so far.
> why can't you wait rather than badger away ?
I'm not badgering you. You had previously said that you already had some
patches, but wanted to test first. If what you really have so far are just
the tests, that's great. Please run them against the new patches I've
submitted. I am sure that there are yet more bugs to fix, since I've just
documented several.
> I am obviously unhappy that the quality of NNTP has degraded.
As far as I can see from the CVS, the defects that I just patched have been
there since before. Regardless, I've checked them against the RFC, as can
you from the descriptions I've posted.
> How do you expect to have the collection of entire set of patches that
> address various clients without sufficient tests.
I don't. But I know that what I just did corrects real verifiable defects,
and that I can now work with OE and Netscape news against my test server.
So there is no reason not to fix what we can easily see as being wrong,
while still waiting for the test suite that we agree is vital.
I appreciate your time constraints. We all have them. But what I've just
posted should not in any way negatively impact either the code or future
changes. No restructuring. Just some very simple in-line patches.
If no one objects to them specifically, I'd like to commit them tomorrow as
a starting point.
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
