Re: [swift-evolution] Proposal for Package Manager Testing Infrastruture

[Rick Ballard via swift-evolution]

My apologies for the delay on this – this has been waiting on me to accept the 
pull request and schedule the formal review. Apple is on holiday shutdown at 
the moment so things are moving slowly right now. I will accept the PR soon and 
expect to schedule the review for the first week of January.

Cheers,

- Rick

> On Dec 26, 2015, at 11:33 PM, Drew Crawford via swift-evolution 
>  wrote:
> 
> I'm wondering what the next steps for this proposal are.
> 
> I see Max's comment from the 16th 
>  
> advising to pull back discussion to the list, but I haven't seen any further 
> discussion in the past 10 days.  Does someone feel that there are outstanding 
> problems to address?  Even if there is some further discussion we need to 
> have, IMO it would be appropriate to have that discussion in the context of a 
> swift-evolution review.
> 
> I personally back the proposal essentially in its entirety.  I think it is 
> vague on some points we will want to take up as separate proposals, but I 
> don't think they are worth holding up the ability to test packages at all, 
> which is the present situation.
> 
> I am not familiar with what exactly the criteria is for that PR to be 
> accepted into swift-evolution and begin a review, which IIRC is the next 
> stage in the process.  I do notice that it is the second oldest of the 12 
> open PRs in the queue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

___
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Re: [swift-evolution] Proposal for Package Manager Testing Infrastruture

[Drew Crawford via swift-evolution]

I'm wondering what the next steps for this proposal are.

I see Max's comment from the 16th 
 
advising to pull back discussion to the list, but I haven't seen any further 
discussion in the past 10 days.  Does someone feel that there are outstanding 
problems to address?  Even if there is some further discussion we need to have, 
IMO it would be appropriate to have that discussion in the context of a 
swift-evolution review.

I personally back the proposal essentially in its entirety.  I think it is 
vague on some points we will want to take up as separate proposals, but I don't 
think they are worth holding up the ability to test packages at all, which is 
the present situation.

I am not familiar with what exactly the criteria is for that PR to be accepted 
into swift-evolution and begin a review, which IIRC is the next stage in the 
process.  I do notice that it is the second oldest of the 12 open PRs in the 
queue.




___
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution