On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 3:21 AM, Evan Huus <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Jeff Morriss <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I saw some emails about the -commits emails still being a work in > progress > > but that was a while ago. Is that still the case? > > > > I just thought I'd mention that I'm not a fan of the current mails where > we > > only get the one line summary of the change: I'd (much) prefer to have > the > > full text of the commit message. > > And as of this morning (or perhaps slightly earlier) I've stopped > receiving them at all...? > > Yes, i confirm too... > You can ask Gerrit (in your user preferences) to send you notification > whenever a patchset is submitted; I'm not sure what those emails look > like but they might be more useful. > > > For example I'd rather see this: > > > >> Fix Bug 9725 'Lua: ProtoField.new() is buggy' > >> > >> Using ProtoField.new() is dicey. Many of the optional arguments > don't > >> properly check the lua stack - they call lua_isnil() for their index > number, > >> instead of lua_gettop() to see the stack size. lua_isnil() may return > false > >> in such cases. > > > > > > Than: > > > >> from c391d74 Fix wslua docs script to handle module names with > >> digits, like Int64/UInt64 > >> adds 2466a7c Fix Bug 9725 'Lua: ProtoField.new() is buggy' > > > > > > I can learn a lot more (and better follow what others are > > discovering/working on) with the details in the former example. > +1 there is interresing to have the same info like : https://code.wireshark.org/review/gitweb?p=wireshark.git;a=log;h=HEAD For example : Add test suite for Lua dissector-related functions Hadriel Kaplan [Thu, 6 Feb 2014 09:14:11 +0100 (03:14 -0500)] Add test suite for Lua dissector-related functions This isn't super-fancy, but it runs a simple protocol dissector and verifies the tshark output matches what it expects. Things like Proto, ProtoField, Field, Tvb, TvbRange, etc., are used in an example dissector script - it dissects DNS... partially. Enough to make sure things aren't fundamentally broken. This provides something to add on top of later as well. Change-Id: Icf3c8e9534944bcf4c4f6150f02a9a43f999cd75 Reviewed-on: https://code.wireshark.org/review/126 Reviewed-by: Alexis La Goutte <[email protected]> Tested-by: Alexis La Goutte <[email protected]> Regards, > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > > Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> > > Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev > > Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev > > mailto:[email protected] > ?subject=unsubscribe > ___________________________________________________________________________ > Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> > Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev > Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev > mailto:[email protected] > ?subject=unsubscribe >
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
