On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Austin Walne wrote:
> I've had these same questions myself. I'm happy to write up some
> documentation this afternoon. I can draft something based on this thread.
> What other key terminology should be included?
Fanquake already started on that (but didn't even
Would someone also clarify the use of "nit" for nitpicking and how it plays
in the role of consensus?
It seems like it's used for minor complaints/preferences.
Drak
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:47 AM, Wladimir wrote:
>
>> Concept ACK -> agree
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:47 AM, Wladimir wrote:
> Concept ACK -> agree with the idea and overall direction, but haven't
> reviewed the code changes nor tested it
>
Concept ACK -> like the idea; the code may need rewriting (or haven't
reviewed).
--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open s
I've had these same questions myself. I'm happy to write up some documentation
this afternoon. I can draft something based on this thread. What other key
terminology should be included?
> On Dec 10, 2014, at 00:21, Wladimir wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 6:47 AM, Wladimir wrote:
>> Abbre
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 6:47 AM, Wladimir wrote:
> Abbreviations:
>
> Concept ACK -> agree with the idea and overall direction, but haven't
> reviewed the code changes nor tested it
> utACK -> reviewed the code changes, but did not put it through any testing
> Tested ACK -> reviewed the code chang
Abbreviations:
Concept ACK -> agree with the idea and overall direction, but haven't
reviewed the code changes nor tested it
utACK -> reviewed the code changes, but did not put it through any testing
Tested ACK -> reviewed the code changes and verified the functionality/bug fix
I tend to only use
Also utACK ("untested ack") and "tested ack" when people are being explicit.
On 12/09/14 21:14, Sergio Lerner wrote:
> Is that the full terminology or are there more acronyms?
> Is this documented somewhere?
>
> Best regards,
> Sergio.
>
>
>
> -
7 matches
Mail list logo
