To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
User mhu changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu May 8 09:07:31 +
2008 ---
Why not just drop the test depemdencies. As I see it there are two usecases:
1.
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Apr 1 09:32:28 +
2008 ---
sb: But the proposed patch does not take care of any unit-test runtime
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Apr 1 14:28:22 +
2008 ---
mmeeks: in general it is anti-social to apply lots of stop-energy to
something on
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Apr 1 17:01:50 +
2008 ---
Something is not better then nothing when we can provide a proper
implementation
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Mar 31 10:44:09 +
2008 ---
@mmeeks: But the proposed patch does not take care of any unit-test runtime
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
User vg changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Mar 31 13:52:15 +
2008 ---
vg: Well, If someone is able to make
changes to tests.lst, making changes to
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Mar 31 15:54:52 +
2008 ---
kendy: as to complexity - any test developer must know which file should be
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Mar 31 17:08:38 +
2008 ---
vg: Ideally both :-) - with my patches 'build check' in a module is possible,
as
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 28 12:23:21 +
2008 ---
vg: we have to re-invent the wheel to some extent.
Unit tests have run-time
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
User vg changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
--- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Mar 27 15:50:12 +
2008 ---
vg: The thing is that I'd like to be as close to the usual behavior as
possible.
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
Issue #|87469
Summary|unittesting infrastructure
Component|tools
Version|DEV300m4
Platform|All
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
User kendy changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=87469
User mh changed the following:
What|Old value |New value
16 matches
Mail list logo
