On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
"Dave" == Dave Rolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dave> I was thinking this might be a good idea. The one thing we'd lose is
Dave> the tests built into the FAQ for testing examples. This is a really
Dave> nice feature, but I think the benefits o
> "Dave" == Dave Rolsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dave> I was thinking this might be a good idea. The one thing we'd lose is
Dave> the tests built into the FAQ for testing examples. This is a really
Dave> nice feature, but I think the benefits of moving to a wiki are bigger.
I dislike FAQ
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Flavio S. Glock wrote:
2005/11/21, Rick Measham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
It's a pity to lose the tests though ..
How about a WWW::Mechanize script that would download the FAQ page and
run tests?
(the script itself would be in a wiki page, such that a volunteer
would easily
2005/11/21, Rick Measham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> It's a pity to lose the tests though ..
How about a WWW::Mechanize script that would download the FAQ page and
run tests?
(the script itself would be in a wiki page, such that a volunteer
would easily start/modify it)
- Flavio S. Glock
Dave Rolsky wrote:
I was thinking this might be a good idea. The one thing we'd lose is
the tests built into the FAQ for testing examples. This is a really
nice feature, but I think the benefits of moving to a wiki are bigger.
I agree with putting it on the wiki .. there's been times when I
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005, Dave Rolsky wrote:
I was thinking this might be a good idea. The one thing we'd lose is the
tests built into the FAQ for testing examples. This is a really nice
feature, but I think the benefits of moving to a wiki are bigger.
There's probably a bunch of other stuff tha
I was thinking this might be a good idea. The one thing we'd lose is the
tests built into the FAQ for testing examples. This is a really nice
feature, but I think the benefits of moving to a wiki are bigger.
Any objections?
-dave
/*===
VegGui
