Sorry all,
I think that this was vastly misinterpreted. I meant this as an inclusive
comment (we all here on this list, including Britton) are in the process
of creating, clarifying, and defining what it means to to testing inside
of yt. This was offered as an explanation as to why there is no formal
documentation for the testing stuff. We (once again inclusive, everybody)
are basically making it up as we go along at this point, taking hints from
other projects and resources, as per the links that were provided and
prior mailing list discussions.
I assumed that since I posted this to yt-dev (and not yt-users) that it was
everyone who receives this message would be included in the "We (yt-devs)"
group. Clearly, I was mistaken on that note. Once again, I am sorry that this
seems to have been misconstrued and I sincerely hope that no offense was taken.
<insert rant about email being an imperfect form of communication here>
Be Well
Anthony
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:00 AM, j s oishi
<jsoishi@gmail.com> wrote:
Anthony,
It's great that you're contributing a lot to yt, and I (at least)
certainly value the work you've been doing. However I think you might
want to reconsider statements like this
> We (all of us yt-devs) are in the process of creating that stuff now.
Not only is it a bit exclusionary in general, as a specific response
to Britton, it is inappropriate. Britton has been around on this
project longer than anyone except Matt and is qualitatively and
quantitatively among the most central people to it:
hotei:/home/../yt-hg [11:50]$ hg churn
matthewturk@gmail.com 1242803 ******************************
stephenskory@yahoo.com 165192 ****
brittonsmith@gmail.com 113308 ***
yours,
Jeff
_______________________________________________
yt-dev mailing list
yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org
http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org