[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Wes Isberg wrote:
> The README-AspectJ links are fine; I expected George's fixes to be
> correct, but was
> surprised that the links been unnoticed but broken so long (it makes sense
> since the former
> link check started from the doc index page).
Good, we're ready to go.
> I'd edit the pages for you, but they're live from CVS - let me know if you
> want me to edit
> and check in or send to you. If you do it, consider removing the stale
> news items about the
> old articles, since we now have an articles page linked off the
> documentation.
I'll go ahead and edit the pages directly.
> Once the tree is tagged, I plan to check in updates to the harness to
> handle file and text
> content of messages, along with test suite upgrades to make all tests pass
> and add new
> tests for command-line error reporting. (I believe we permit test
> upgrades without
> discussion if they break nothing, including reasonable/functional
> expectations.)
I agree. Adding new tests or improving the quality of old tests is always encouraged. When these changes cause existing tests to fail we should discuss them on this list in order to have confidence that they're revealing new bugs rather than breaking reasonable expectations.
-Jim
