On 16 Nov 2013, at 17:50, kilon alios <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:

A bit more details would help. For example I certainly dont mind testing fixes and marking them as resolved. My problem is that I am not an experienced smalltalker so I cant be sure what the expected behavior is.�

Is there a guideline, criteria , principles a fix should follow, or is it just a matter "if it works, its ok" ? Also I was curious what happens to a fix after its marked as resolved, how exactly the slice is integrated ? �

That is the problem� it�s not an algorithmic decision. It�s �Do you think this is a good idea to do and is the implementation ok?�.

Marcus

On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:

So we now have an automatic system to check that a change does not break tests and even passes Code Critique.

Nevertheless, this does *not* mean that any change that passes is good. (e.g. a change that just deletes all tests is fine for
the monkey).

So we *need* people to look at proposed changes!

Right now I feel that I decide far too many things. It would be very nice to have the input of more people.

� � � � Marcus