Local Planet Server?
rubys at intertwingly.net
Mon May 22 12:24:19 EST 2006
Jeff Waugh wrote:
> <quote who="Sam Ruby">
>>I've committed some code to my respository that allows Planet to act as
>>a standalone HTTP server, with an intention of growing it into a simple,
>>and easy to use interface by which people can create and manage their
>>own planet instances.
> This looks sweet, but it (and the reading lists stuff you've been working
> on) is a great candidate for creating a new feature branch. I don't think
> I'll take these changes before 1.0, so until then, I'll just have to skip
> some of the stuff in your repo.
> Thanks, looking good,
I don't object to that, but my preference is that the refactoring
portions of my changes are committed.
Example: a few hours ago, I committed a fix whereby changes in 'updated'
dates are not reflected back into the cache correctly. A concrete
example: Tim Bray often updates his entries with new information. Other
times, he makes minor corrections. For the former, he updates the date.
For the latter he does not. You can see the results here:
The reason why I bring this up is that the test case that I committed at
the same time makes use of the refactored methods:
(I suspect that Mary will like this test as it is getting close to being
a functional test. The hard part about retroactively growing a test
suite is getting enough examples so that people can copy an existing
test when fixing a new bug).
- Sam Ruby
P.S. I also fixed a bug today regarding specifying timeout in the
More information about the devel