Process, harvesting, getting your favorite things in the image

Joshua 'Schwa' Gargus schwa at cc.gatech.edu
Sat Mar 8 15:00:40 UTC 2003


On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 12:13:39PM +0300, Daniel Vainsencher wrote:
> The rules, As Given By Bert ;-) are thus -
> The comment is everything from the last $( to the end of the sentence.
> The comment gets shown, nothing before it. So if you happen to write
> (et)(er), the et part won't show. So, the simplified, human compatible 
> rules are - ONE pair of parenthesis, at the end, appended to a precise 
> copy of the original posts subject.

Right, that's better.  The previous version of the swiki page was
technically correct, but required a bit too much manual parsing.  The
running HumptyDumpty example now includes and example of proper tag
use.

> 
> That's as far as the code part of the law. 
> 
> Note that the specific tags have two purposes -
> - Make life easier for the harvesters, in order to make the process
> faster.
> - Raise our standards. You'll note that one of the tags that we really
> want people to use is the SLint tool. Yes, it's a new tool, but it often
> brings to one attention things like "now that you mention it, maybe a
> shorter method would be better". So please, use the tags. Even for a
> very short update such as Diegos MethodReference fix, it drew my
> attention to it.

The first was clear.  Reading the second makes sense, but I'm not sure
that I explicitly realized it before your email.  

What about an [su] tag if SUnit tests are included or if the changeset
passes relevant existing SUnit tests?

> 
> Of course, the SLint tool is on SM, just install the RefactoringBrowser,
> and type LintDialog open (hmm, should add it to the open menu). Check it
> out!

Will do.

Joshua


> 
> Daniel
> 
> Joshua 'Schwa' Gargus <schwa at cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
> > It appears that the [et], [er] comment tags have to be within the
> > comment parentheses (since a post by Tim with the comment tags
> > preceding the parentheses didn't make it through).  The documentation
> > on the swiki doesn't reflect this.
> > 
> > Is this be the desired behavior?  It seems reasonable to me; I'll make
> > the appropriate change to the swiki documentation.
> > 
> > This all very exciting!  Thanks to everyone involved in harvesting,
> > refactoring, packaging, etc.
> > 
> > Joshua
> > 
> > 
> > On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 01:31:01AM -0500, Doug Way wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Friday, March 7, 2003, at 12:35 PM, Jesse Welton wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Brent Vukmer wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Cool feature!  One minor thing: the tags *read* a little weird.
> > > >> "et, er - it's beautiful" sounds like someone stuttering :)
> > > >> Also the tags look kind of like 'Who is Who' nicknames.  Could we
> > > >> put fix tags in some kind of brackets?
> > > >
> > > >> [Fix] Adjust the background to a paler shade of gray
> > > >>   Jane Doe (2/3/4)
> > > >>   Joe Shmoe (5/3/4) (<et><er> - it's beautiful)
> > > >
> > > > I'll second that.  This way reads alot more clearly for me, as well.
> > > 
> > > I see that Brent (or somebody) ended up using square brackets in the 
> > > swiki page docs, which I probably like the most.  Like this:
> > > 
> > >    [FIX] Adjust the background to a paler shade of gray
> > >      Jane Doe (2/3/03)
> > >      Joe Shmoe (5/3/03) ([et][er] - it's beautiful)
> > > 
> > > http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/398
> > > 
> > > But we don't have to be too rigid about this, as long as they're not 
> > > parentheses, which apparently messes up the sqfixes parser. :-)
> > > 
> > > - Doug Way
> > >



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list