1.0.1 update:
I've just comitted all patches that could be applied cleanly and
commented on those that couldn't. I'd appreciate the owners of those
patches I couldn't commit to take a look at them and everyone running
form SVN to upgrade to test that everything is working properly to
guarantee 1.0.1's stability (tests pass, of course...)
One thing I had to comment in many of those patches is the preferred
way of diffing, which is:
1) Checkout the 1.0 branch and "python setup.py develop" it.
2) Make your changes.
3) A *big* plus will be awarded for those tickets implementing tests
to make sure changes work as expected and prevent future regressions.
Docstrings and comments at the code will make future maintainers life
easier... (hmm, should I blush for saying that? hey! TW's docstrings
are not *that* badly documented! ;)
3.5) If a new file is created "svn add" it (even if you don't have
comitt access ATM)
4) run "python setup.py test" (or nosetests directly, first method
preferred because it's needed for setuptools namespace packages and
2.0 will most probably use them... better get used to it now.. ;) All
tests should be passing.
5) if everything passes, run "svn diff > my_patch.diff" from the
*root* of your SVN checkout. this will create a *unified* diff of
everything that changed which is easiest to apply.
6) Attach it at a ticket and include [PATCH] in the summary so i'ts
easier to spot.
Maybe this guidelines could be extended and cleaned up up a bit and
posted somewhere at the docs wiki (Karl, (Doc Wiki BDFL), where can I
do that?)
Thanks everyone working on those tickets! :)
Alberto
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TurboGears" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
