Stefan Sperling writes:
> (I guess you're getting the idea, but I'd still like to point out that,
> for new functions, it's OK to just say 'New function.'. But if you make
> further changes to the functions, just saying 'I changed this function.'
> is not detailed enough... :)
> Note also that writing good log messages needs a lot of practice and time.
> And there's a lot of personal opinion involved in deciding what makes a
> log message "good". At the same time, as a project we're trying to be very
> consistent in the way we write log messages. So the ground is a bit shaky
> for newcomers. Don't be offended when we criticise your log messages.
> Just try to follow existing examples and get used to the project's style
> of writing log messages. And soon you'll reach peoples' log message comfort
> level and they will stop nitpicking.
Thanks for the nitpick. I now see what's wrong with my log messages-
I'll pay more attention next time, and make sure that I don't write my
log messages in a hurry.
> Looks like you forgot to attach the new diff?
> Please refrain from adding regression tests that take a lot of time
> to execute, if possible. Our test suite already takes a long time to
> run as is. We want such tests, but they should be optional.
> But don't let this stop you from writing more tests.
> Unfortunately, we don't have a nice way of adding optional regression
> tests to our test suite, and I don't expect you to start working on
> that, too (there's enough on your plate as is).
> When you have new tests, post a diff, and we'll see what to do with it.
> Maybe it's time to finally address this problem in our test suite.
Got it. Yes, I'm doing too many things at once. Daniel taught me how
to use changelists, so I'll use them to keep track of what all I'm
Received on 2010-07-24 11:45:08 CEST