On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 05:04:06PM +0300, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 02:50:13PM +0100, Ondrej Certik wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > google now for some time allows to sort the issues as we want, so if you go
> > to:
> >
> > http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/list
> >
> > the first issues are the ones with a milestone set, the rest is sorted
> > according to a priority.
> > Usually, the time each of us can put into sympy is scattered - so what
> > I do is that I
> > just open the issues and try to fix some of the top ones.
> >
> > So the priority should be set according to what is best for sympy. So
> > my proposition:
> >
> > * critical - those that need to be fixed right now (maybe some failing
> > tests, etc.)
> > * high - all usability issues reported by users, that are quite easy
> > to fix, like integrate() method not working
> > for some particular integral, or __nonzero__ working, or bad
> > cooperation with numpy etc. This is very
> > important to get fixed, because if the user reported it, it means it's
> > important for them, and
> > most of it is quite easy for us to fix
> > * normal - all other bugs - either difficult to fix (if we are not
> > even sure about the approach), or just enhancements, etc.
> > * low - the rest
>
> Agree.
Also, maybe let's write xfailing tests for reported issues *before*
fixing them?
This way we will be able to see that some issue is fixed automatically
by other change.
--
Всего хорошего, Кирилл.
http://landau.phys.spbu.ru/~kirr/aiv/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sympy" group.
To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
