On Sunday, February 16, 2014 4:35:05 AM UTC+5:30, Florian Apolloner wrote:
>
> On Saturday, February 15, 2014 5:01:09 PM UTC+1, anubhav joshi wrote:
>>
>> Well I will see what I put in my proposal..it will be based on
>> aggregation/annotation as well as improving the error message part as
I am not trying to say that I can solve all the issues myself, that is no
way possible. But I had wanted to base my work on aggregation part but I
think quite has been done so I just said that I would now explore other
areas as well. I have no intention of telling that I could do all, I merely
On Sunday, February 16, 2014 3:13:28 AM UTC+1, Justin Holmes wrote:
>
> I didn't mean to suggest that it was nefarious. It's just that that
> ticket had some... sentimental value. ;-)
>
I am pretty sure it's implemented by now:
http://web.archive.org/web/20060105063700/http://code.djangoproj
I didn't mean to suggest that it was nefarious. It's just that that ticket
had some... sentimental value. ;-)
On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Russell Keith-Magee <
russ...@keith-magee.com> wrote:
>
> There isn't anything nefarious going on here; we delete tickets
> occasionally. It's usually
Just a few observations that I've had when running the test suite that may
be relevant.
- There are lots and lots of different test modules that may be relevant to
a particular change, and some may not seem relevant until you run the
entire suite
- bug* modules are hard to classify without read
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 1:12 AM, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> On Feb 15, 2014, at 11:43 AM, Christopher Medrela
> wrote:
>
> My last post was pretty long and the most important questions and
> statements
> have left unanswered, so I will repeat them.
>
> What I'm proposing now is more conservative p
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 12:43 AM, Christopher Medrela <
chris.medr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My last post was pretty long and the most important questions and
> statements
> have left unanswered, so I will repeat them.
>
> What I'm proposing now is more conservative proposal. Firstly, Django will
> s
There isn't anything nefarious going on here; we delete tickets
occasionally. It's usually due to spam. There's a lot of deleted tickets in
the 20k range.
Yours,
Russ Magee %-)
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Justin Holmes wrote:
> It appears that Ticket #9 has been deleted? Anybody know why?
It appears that Ticket #9 has been deleted? Anybody know why?
https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/9
--
Justin Holmes
Chief Chocobo Breeder, slashRoot
slashRoot: Coffee House and Tech Dojo
New Paltz, NY 12561
845.633.8330
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
On Saturday, February 15, 2014 5:01:09 PM UTC+1, anubhav joshi wrote:
>
> Well I will see what I put in my proposal..it will be based on
> aggregation/annotation as well as improving the error message part as
> before...I might now look to other things as well like improving tests as
> well.
On 15 Feb 2014 18:13, "Donald Stufft" wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 15, 2014, at 11:43 AM, Christopher Medrela
wrote:
>
>> My last post was pretty long and the most important questions and
statements
>> have left unanswered, so I will repeat them.
>>
>> What I'm proposing now is more conservative proposal.
On Feb 15, 2014, at 11:43 AM, Christopher Medrela
wrote:
> My last post was pretty long and the most important questions and statements
> have left unanswered, so I will repeat them.
>
> What I'm proposing now is more conservative proposal. Firstly, Django will
> support Jinja2 out-of-the-box,
My last post was pretty long and the most important questions and statements
have left unanswered, so I will repeat them.
What I'm proposing now is more conservative proposal. Firstly, Django will
support Jinja2 out-of-the-box, but DTL will remain the "blessed" option.
Secondly, Django will allow
Well I will see what I put in my proposal..it will be based on
aggregation/annotation as well as improving the error message part as
before...I might now look to other things as well like improving tests as
well.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Gro
Hi all,
On Sat, 15 Feb 2014, Russell Keith-Magee wrote:
One of the improvements I see is classification of test cases.
Classifying them into categories (read multiple-categories), would make
it easier for users/developers/maintainers to run them. Basis of
classification,etc is what I am still
15 matches
Mail list logo