so hijackit, are we on for wednesday morning/afternoon/evening/night?
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:52 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Daan Hoogland
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:12 PM, David Nalley wrote:
>>> I do favor (extensive) unit tests as criteria.
>>>
>
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:12 PM, David Nalley wrote:
>> I do favor (extensive) unit tests as criteria.
>>
>> Disagreeing is fine - no one (least of all me) says that my opinion is
>> right all of the time. :)
>>
>> Over time I've become less
dtimebuddy.com/cet-to-est-converter
>
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 1:17 PM
>> To: dev
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL][SIMPLIFY] Future ACS RC testing
>>
>> On Mon, S
]
> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 1:17 PM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL][SIMPLIFY] Future ACS RC testing
>
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:12 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> > I do favor (extensive) unit tests as criteria.
> >
> > Disagreeing is fine - no one (least of all
I think this discussion should be linked with the discussion about minimum
requirements for a release (release criteria). It seems this discussion is
already being had to some degree.
On Sep 16, 2013 5:27 AM, "sebgoa" wrote:
>
> On Sep 15, 2013, at 8:24 PM, Daan Hoogland
> wrote:
>
> > Sebastien
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> A worthy cause, and we should all strive for it. It does put extra
> constraints on things like db upgrade scripts however. If ACS is
> releasable at all times, can users make their own release and expect
> all upgrade paths to work?
>
> I d
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:12 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> I do favor (extensive) unit tests as criteria.
>
> Disagreeing is fine - no one (least of all me) says that my opinion is
> right all of the time. :)
>
> Over time I've become less concerned about a feature working, and more
> concerned about
A worthy cause, and we should all strive for it. It does put extra
constraints on things like db upgrade scripts however. If ACS is
releasable at all times, can users make their own release and expect
all upgrade paths to work?
I disagreed with you on documentation as a commit criteria in another
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
> I think this discussion should be linked with the discussion about minimum
> requirements for a release (release criteria). It seems this discussion is
> already being had to some degree.
Agreed. I think release criteria are important -
shoot a time, you will miss some of us. how about wednesday 19:00 cet
this is the time the irc meeting used to be.
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:27 PM, sebgoa wrote:
>
> On Sep 15, 2013, at 8:24 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
>
>> Sebastien,
>>
>> Are you thinking november in Amsterdam, or before?
>
> I w
On Sep 15, 2013, at 8:24 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> Sebastien,
>
> Are you thinking november in Amsterdam, or before?
I was thinking about a conference call - way before Amsterdam-
>
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 9:06 AM, sebgoa wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 11, 2013, at 5:25 PM, "Musayev, Ilya" wrote:
Sebastien,
Are you thinking november in Amsterdam, or before?
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 9:06 AM, sebgoa wrote:
>
> On Sep 11, 2013, at 5:25 PM, "Musayev, Ilya" wrote:
>
>> As mentioned on private, I think the reason we have so few responders when
>> it comes to voting - is because it takes consi
On Sep 11, 2013, at 5:25 PM, "Musayev, Ilya" wrote:
> As mentioned on private, I think the reason we have so few responders when it
> comes to voting - is because it takes considerable amount of time to build,
> test and QA. And if you take voting serious as everyone should, you have to
> QA
As mentioned on private, I think the reason we have so few responders when it
comes to voting - is because it takes considerable amount of time to build,
test and QA. And if you take voting serious as everyone should, you have to QA
before you can vote.
Perhaps we should spent some time on au
14 matches
Mail list logo