Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] Deciding on a default company setup for BDD tests

2016-01-23 Thread David G
On 24/01/16 00:12, Erik Huelsmann wrote: Hi, > I think this is a better long term solution as for many scenarios it may > be impossible to properly remove en

Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] Deciding on a default company setup for BDD tests

2016-01-23 Thread David G
Hi, On 24/01/16 05:51, John Locke wrote: Hi, On 01/23/2016 08:12 AM, Erik Huelsmann wrote: Hi,   What we're really

Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] Deciding on a default company setup for BDD tests

2016-01-23 Thread John Locke
Hi, On 01/23/2016 08:12 AM, Erik Huelsmann wrote: Hi, What we're really talking about here is how to set up test data -- whether we ship a test database already containing data our tests rely upon, or have those dependencies created when running the tests. I pretty strongly ad

Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] Deciding on a default company setup for BDD tests

2016-01-23 Thread Erik Huelsmann
Hi, > I think this is a better long term solution as for many scenarios it may > > be impossible to properly remove entries from the database due to the > > Audit Features we have. > > Drupal has a tremendous amount of variation between sites, and lots of > configuration that ends up in the databa

Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] RFC: Feedback on design of PGObject and what should be fixed in 2.0

2016-01-23 Thread Chris Travers
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 7:05 PM, Chris Bennett wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 09:13:52AM +0100, Chris Travers wrote: >> Hi; >> >> Have any other developers worked with the PGObject framework here? >> >> Here are my thoughts regarding things which should probably be changed: >> >> 1. I would lik