From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11745 invoked by uid 1002); 29 Nov 2003 14:46:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-portage-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail Reply-To: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 27113 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2003 14:46:38 -0000 X-WM-Posted-At: mailandnews.com; Sat, 29 Nov 03 09:46:37 -0500 From: Jason Stubbs To: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 23:46:16 +0900 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.93 References: <1069588805.28236.17.camel@antares.hausnetz> <200311271703.47562.jasonbstubbs@mailandnews.com> <20031127084244.GA29988@unm.edu> In-Reply-To: <20031127084244.GA29988@unm.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200311292346.16736.jasonbstubbs@mailandnews.com> Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev] Web-based Portage Frontendg X-Archives-Salt: 36e8ce05-8fb5-4164-ac0d-40013bb99d51 X-Archives-Hash: f2411e41dd17678ad432227cd95a9d01 On Thursday 27 November 2003 17:42, Jason Mobarak wrote: > Somethings you need to do to get up to speed on unit tests: > > 1) Read the documentation for the unittest module in the Python standard > library. > 2) Read http://pyunit.sourceforge.net/pyunit.html > 3) Get a CVS CO of Twistedmatrix.com's CVS and look over how they do there > unit tests, they use their own implementation of unittest but the > differences are minor All complete. I didn't read every line of twisted's unittests but I get the idea. I've also kept it for a reference. > On 17:03 Thu 27 Nov , Jason Stubbs wrote: > > I think there's two ways to attack it: > > > > a) I work through documenting everything while you work through > > separating everything that's documented. Once the documenting is done, I > > can begin unit testing and you can join me once the separation is done. > > b) You document and separate and I unit test what has been completed. > > I like (b), > > > BTW, will this work become redundant by portage-ng? > > I hope after portage is separated into a library the code can be > incorporated into "portage-ng", we could very well be working on the > beginnings of the next generation of portage. I want to add "layers" to how > everything interacts, key design patterns being heavy focusing on "plug-in" > orientation and model-view-control. Some keywords you should research if you > are interested in this are Mix-In style programming and the use of > interfaces to abstract aggregate interaction between sections of a program. > > "Portage-ng" is being touted as a complete rewrite currently (from what I > remember) and it seems senseless to throw away the 10k lines of code that > make up the current portage system. Well, it seems it is a complete redesign from scratch, but the complete rewrite will be much longer coming. If you are still interested in continuing your work, I'm still interested in helping. If we do it properly, it should not be too difficult to remodel it to fit the design spec of portage-ng once it is completed. The components can be replaced by more advanced versions later if need be, but as you say there's no point in throwing 10k lines of code away. Regards, Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list