Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Test-Stream! Test-Simple! Go!
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Ricardo Signes
Nov 23, 2015, 6:30:01 PM11/23/15
to per...@perl.org
Wow, the last update on this was in April! Then stuff came up. Has all the
stuff that came up gone down? I hope so.
I think that there is not one person who wants the up-in-the-air-ness of
Test-Builder-on-Test-Stream to last longer than it has to. I sure don't. Now
that it seems like there is some momentum, I would like to get things moving
forward, and I will provide the shoves as needed.
In Berlin, we made a list of tasks that we thought were a good set of
acceptance criteria for this change. It is here:
https://gist.github.com/dagolden/2134567dc1125d20d375
I said that I would conduct regular checkins with Chad about this, and we did
that for a while. I propose to start doing that again.
I also predict that I will want to add a set of further goals, primarily to
get more buy-in from the group. These will be things like code review of
specific parts of the system.
What I'd like to do next:
* make a set of GitHub issues for the punch list, tagged as such
* make GitHub issues for other topics to review, also tagged
Some of these topics, I would like to mark as "to be discussed" *and then
expressly deferred* until more central issues are sorted out. For example, if
we think that the whole thing needs to be scrapped, I don't want to argue about
the documentation style. ;)
First: Sound good to you, Chad and everybody else?
Secondly: This doesn't mean you should stop looking at things, flagging
issues, or talking to Chad about stuff! It just means that I'm going to try to
maintain a structured record and make sure we're making progress and not just
noise.
--
rjbs
stuff that came up gone down? I hope so.
I think that there is not one person who wants the up-in-the-air-ness of
Test-Builder-on-Test-Stream to last longer than it has to. I sure don't. Now
that it seems like there is some momentum, I would like to get things moving
forward, and I will provide the shoves as needed.
In Berlin, we made a list of tasks that we thought were a good set of
acceptance criteria for this change. It is here:
https://gist.github.com/dagolden/2134567dc1125d20d375
I said that I would conduct regular checkins with Chad about this, and we did
that for a while. I propose to start doing that again.
I also predict that I will want to add a set of further goals, primarily to
get more buy-in from the group. These will be things like code review of
specific parts of the system.
What I'd like to do next:
* make a set of GitHub issues for the punch list, tagged as such
* make GitHub issues for other topics to review, also tagged
Some of these topics, I would like to mark as "to be discussed" *and then
expressly deferred* until more central issues are sorted out. For example, if
we think that the whole thing needs to be scrapped, I don't want to argue about
the documentation style. ;)
First: Sound good to you, Chad and everybody else?
Secondly: This doesn't mean you should stop looking at things, flagging
issues, or talking to Chad about stuff! It just means that I'm going to try to
maintain a structured record and make sure we're making progress and not just
noise.
--
rjbs
Ricardo Signes
Nov 26, 2015, 10:00:01 AM11/26/15
to per...@perl.org
* Ricardo Signes <per...@rjbs.manxome.org> [2015-11-23T18:12:22]
> * make GitHub issues for other topics to review, also tagged
More to come soon.
--
rjbs
> * make a set of GitHub issues for the punch list, tagged as such
https://github.com/Test-More/test-more/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3ATest-Stream
> * make GitHub issues for other topics to review, also tagged
--
rjbs
0 new messages