On 19 juin 2013, at 10:34, Russell Keith-Magee <[email protected]> wrote:
> 1) Keep checksetup as a name, and integrate the GSoC work under that new name > (including making the API entry points called check() or checksetup() ). > > 2) Rename `checksetup` to `verify`, setting the groundwork for the GSoC to > expand on the implementation that is already there > > 3) Keep both commands. > > Opinions? I don't think (3) is the way to go - I'm not sure how we'd explain > the existence of both commands. I could go either way on (1) or (2) though -- > I'm not in love with either name, we just need to pick one. I'm not a native speaker, but it seems to me that "check" better reflects the concept we're talking about than "verify". Also, it's shorter :) My vote would be for standardizing to "check" rather than "checksetup" — since the checking framework could check for things that aren't strictly part of the setup. -- Aymeric. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
