Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 21 March 2006 02:54, Chris Withers wrote:
I particularly hate the fact that no real effort was put into backwards
compatibility, not to mention those silly weird
sort-of-fifty-dots-per-line thing that doesn't actually work.
I think this is not fair. Jim has
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
I'm not sure what Chris meant, but the change to the visual output of
the testrunner when running with dots seems gratuitous to me, as well
-- I don't see any benefit to the indented, narrower output,
Me neither, for what it's worth.
Okay,
Philipp von Weitershausen wrote:
I've
never installed Zope anywhere except on production servers anyway, and
there you should obviously use releases.
I don't think obviously necessarily applies there. There are good
reasons for wanting to install from a checkout.
If you absolutely must
Jim Fulton wrote:
From the old testrunner, which I miss *a lot*, I could ensure I am
indeed running a specific module by doing...
Yup, this is one of the things I like least from the Zope 3 world.
What happened to proposals and community agreement before inflicting
big changes on other
On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 06:25:41PM +0100, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Anyway, a release and the development situation looking similar helps
people actually work on the same codebase and structure, and not having
to learn different ways of doing things as soon as they switch. Forcing
context
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
From the old testrunner, which I miss *a lot*, I could ensure I am
indeed running a specific module by doing...
Yup, this is one of the things I like least from the Zope 3 world. What
happened to proposals and community agreement before inflicting big
changes on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jim Fulton wrote:
Chris Withers wrote:
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
From the old testrunner, which I miss *a lot*, I could ensure I am
indeed running a specific module by doing...
Yup, this is one of the things I like least from the Zope 3
