>
> Stef wrote:
>> 4. We should have a consistent naming of Test-Package
>
> I dislike this and I already mentioned that I would rather
> follow a better scheme (the one from Seaside)
I hate all the conventions that are there just to accomodate MC.
I would prefer to have
MyPackage-Tests
MyPackage-Settings
MyPackage-Stuff
MyPackage-Core
>
> Class categories/packages are tyically sorted alphabetically
> in the browser and other tools like Monticello.
> So the code and the tests are not together in the tools
> with this scheme.
Yes I hate that too :)
I want object thinking everywhere so we are in sync.
>
> And yes, real packages would be a plus ;)
>
>> open bug entry
>
> done, see issue #2319
>
> Adrian wrote:
>> If you run this in a Pharo image, it also does not leave any dirty
>> >packages, but obviously it does not remove the tests from external
>> >packages. To achieve this, the maintainers of external packages would need
>> >to separate the tests from the rest of their code.
>
> I know ... when people see pharo they typically see "pharo-dev"
> instead of "pharo-core". We want to shrink the core and grow the
> dev image - both with the same quality. Question left is how we
> can influence better quality for included external packages too...
>
>
> Bye
> T.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
