Oh, thank you! Sometimes it's a good idea to have a look at the
documentation of ALL used functions...
Sorry for the trouble.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send a
On 2017-07-15, Simon King wrote:
> That's exactly why my suggestion is good: The patchbots should verify
> that all tests pass with any subset of the optional packages that
> are dealt with in the ticket (of course including the empty subset).
On second thought: My suggestion wouldn't work, since
PS:
On 2017-07-15, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you want a patchbot to test meataxe then the package needs to be
> installed on the computer! That's all it needs. It only depends on the
> patchbot administrator. You can run one with meataxe if you need it.
Of course
On 2017-07-15, Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Your suggestion about optional packages is not good: all the tests
> should pass, with or without meataxe being installed.
That's exactly why my suggestion is good: The patchbots should verify
that all tests pass with any subse
Hi Simon,
If you want a patchbot to test meataxe then the package needs to be
installed on the computer! That's all it needs. It only depends on the
patchbot administrator. You can run one with meataxe if you need it.
Your suggestion about optional packages is not good: all the tests
should
Hi!
Currently I do some work on the optional meataxe package. Problem:
I got the impression that the patchbots run the tests *without*
meataxe being installed, as they detect forgotten "# optional: meataxe"
marks in the tests. But it would be nice if they would also test *with*
meataxe installed.
