[perl #58742] [TODO] Marker for RTs re SmartLinks

2008-09-17 Thread James Keenan via RT
On Wed Sep 17 05:30:18 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > 4. I will then open up a new RT of the [RFC] class. This ticket will > > call for development of a specification of a way to visually display the > > extent to which Parrot's tests cover the specification. I'll be quoting > > from p

[perl #58742] [TODO] Marker for RTs re SmartLinks

2008-09-17 Thread James Keenan via RT
On Tue Sep 16 15:45:47 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > 2. I will apply a refined version of the patch. It will delete inline > comments referring to the deleted tickets. But I will leave to others > dealing with reference to smartlinks under languages/. Done, now that release has been cut.

[perl #58742] [TODO] Marker for RTs re SmartLinks

2008-09-16 Thread James Keenan via RT
On Tue Sep 16 15:45:47 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Okay, here's what I propose we do: > > 1. I will examine the 12 unresolved tickets to see if there are any > which will not be automatically closable once my patch is applied. > Examination complete. > 2. I will apply a refined versio

[perl #58742] [TODO] Marker for RTs re SmartLinks

2008-09-16 Thread James Keenan via RT
On Tue Sep 16 06:50:26 2008, particle wrote: > > > parrot needs a way for us to measure spec coverage in our test suite. > i started the current smartlinks code as an experiment in using moose, > and as a reaction to the mess of smartlink code that's in the pugs > repo. however, i'm not married to

Re: [perl #58742] [TODO] Marker for RTs re SmartLinks

2008-09-16 Thread jerry gay
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 5:14 AM, James Keenan via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue Sep 16 00:08:29 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> On Monday 15 September 2008 20:06:11 James Keenan via RT wrote: >> >> > See patch attached. The patch eliminates smartlink-related code from >> > Parrot, but d

[perl #58742] [TODO] Marker for RTs re SmartLinks

2008-09-15 Thread James Keenan via RT
On Sun Sep 14 12:17:51 2008, szbalint wrote: > I've looked at the state of the Smart Link concept as applied for Parrot > and it looks like there are some issues that would need to be addressed > before progress can be made on some tickets and other tickets might not > make sense. > > The format o