2010/6/1 Stéfan van der Walt <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:stefan@sun.ac.za">stefan@sun.ac.za</a>></span><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
2010/6/1 Stéfan van der Walt <<a href="mailto:stefan@sun.ac.za">stefan@sun.ac.za</a>>:<br>
<div class="im">>> 0) No one has disputed that we have (and have had for some amount of time,<br>
>> i.e., it didn't go into affect yesterday) a standing policy that new code<br>
>> submissions are supposed to have passing tests and a Standard-compliant<br>
>> docstring *before* being checked-in, and<br>
><br>
> We have had many discussions around unit testing and code review, but<br>
> the fact is that there is no such policy. Whether that should change<br>
> or not is another question.<br>
<br>
</div>Looks like I read your message too hastily. I meant to comment on a<br>
policy surrounding addition of tests and code review.<br>
<br>
By the way, you'll notice that we have *guidelines*, not policy. I<br>
think that this is an important indicator of the way that SciPy<br>
development takes place (we agree by consensus and help each other<br>
out, rather than enforcing restrictions).<br>
<br>
If our guidelines may be modified to benefit one another so that we<br>
may all enjoy working on SciPy, that would be a good thing.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
Regards<br>
Stéfan<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>Thanks, Stéfan. So, we don't have a policy (or even a guideline that I could see) addressing minimum requirements code must meet before check-in - my apologies to all, and especially Travis.<br>
<br>DG<br>