Stef wrote:
4. We should have a consistent naming of Test-Package
I dislike this and I already mentioned that I would rather follow a better scheme (the one from Seaside)
I hate all the conventions that are there just to accomodate MC. I would prefer to have MyPackage-Tests MyPackage-Settings MyPackage-Stuff MyPackage-Core
Class categories/packages are tyically sorted alphabetically in the browser and other tools like Monticello. So the code and the tests are not together in the tools with this scheme.
Yes I hate that too :) I want object thinking everywhere so we are in sync.
And yes, real packages would be a plus ;)
open bug entry
done, see issue #2319
Adrian wrote:
If you run this in a Pharo image, it also does not leave any dirty >packages, but obviously it does not remove the tests from external >packages. To achieve this, the maintainers of external packages would need >to separate the tests from the rest of their code.
I know ... when people see pharo they typically see "pharo-dev" instead of "pharo-core". We want to shrink the core and grow the dev image - both with the same quality. Question left is how we can influence better quality for included external packages too...
Bye T.
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project