Super!

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Jody Garnett <[email protected]>wrote:

> First of all I want to congradulate both you and emily; this is a
> really nice bit of functionality and is exactly in the spirit of udig
> (ie assume sensible defaults based on what the user is doing).
>
> Changed made as I went over this body of code:
> - broke out an an enum UnitPolicy
> - changed a view variable names such as scalebar_units to scalebarUnits
> - ran find bugs and so on
>
> A great effort.
> Jody
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Craig Taverner <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi Jody,
> >
> > The issues were UDIG-434 and UDIG-661. I had not commented the revision
> > number, but I've just checked with svn log, and it looks like I committed
> to
> > r31181 (my commit comment is very clear). The code changes were in four
> > places, the mapgraphic plugin, the distancetool, the ui preferences
> > (externalized strings) and catalog.util.CRSUtil (as the obvious place to
> put
> > the utility for determining metric/imperial from the CRS).
> >
> > Cheers, Craig
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 1:56 AM, Jody Garnett <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> I would of opened them; add a comment to expand scope; and then marked
> >> them as resolved when your work was done.
> >>
> >> Can you remind me of the issue (hopefully a comment indicates what
> >> revision your fix was applied in) and I would be happy to review your
> >> contribution.
> >>
> >> There is process and there is communicaiton; it sounds like Silvia and
> >> yourself are communicating just fine.
> >>
> >> Jody
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Craig Taverner <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> > Hi Jody,
> >> >
> >> > I'm also curious about your code review of the automatic units
> detection
> >> > code I wrote, since it is my very first direct contribution to uDIG,
> and
> >> > I
> >> > seem to remember you had a code review policy on new contributions.
> >> > (even
> >> > simple ones like this).
> >> >
> >> > And I have a question about the resolved->closed process. The two
> issues
> >> > I
> >> > looked at as a tester were fixed by Emily, and I confirmed that her
> >> > fixes
> >> > worked, and so was going to close them (with a tester hat on), but
> then
> >> > I
> >> > did the extra development, tested that, and only then closed the
> issues,
> >> > which sort of meant I closed the issues after I developed them. Silvia
> >> > noticed this and expressed her concerns. I wonder if in this
> situation,
> >> > I
> >> > should still have closed the original issues, but also created a new
> >> > 'improvement request', coded that, put that to resolved, and had
> another
> >> > tester, like Silvia, test and close it?
> >> >
> >> > Perhaps I'm over-complicating things? :-)
> >> > Cheers, Craig
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 1:14 AM, Jody Garnett <[email protected]
> >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> It is okay to verify/close issues running uDig from trunk. I can try
> >> >> making another release this evening (although Mark and I may fix the
> >> >> title caching first).
> >> >> Jody
> >> >>
> >> >> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 10:58 AM, John Hudson
> >> >> <[email protected]>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > Hey all,
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Is it ok to verify/close issues running uDig from trunk; or should
> I
> >> >> > wait
> >> >> > for a new build?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Johnathon Hudson
> >> >> > Software Engineer
> >> >> >
> >> >> > LISAsoft Pty Ltd
> >> >> >
> >> >> > [email protected]
> >> >> > Level 1, 30 Currie Street
> >> >> > Adelaide SA 5000 AUSTRALIA
> >> >> > Ph: +61 8 8425 8050
> >> >> > Fax: +61 8 8425 8099
> >> >> > Mobile: +61 402 300 415
> >> >> > Website: www.lisasoft.com
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ________________________________
> >> >> > The contents of this email are confidential and may be subject to
> >> >> > legal
> >> >> > or
> >> >> > professional privilege and copyright. No representation is made
> that
> >> >> > this
> >> >> > email is free of viruses or other defects. If you have received
> this
> >> >> > communication in error, you may not copy or distribute any part of
> it
> >> >> > or
> >> >> > otherwise disclose its contents to anyone. Please advise the sender
> >> >> > of
> >> >> > your
> >> >> > incorrect receipt of this correspondence.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >> > User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
> >> >> > http://udig.refractions.net
> >> >> > http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
> >> >> http://udig.refractions.net
> >> >> http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
> >> > http://udig.refractions.net
> >> > http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
> >> >
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
> >> http://udig.refractions.net
> >> http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
> > http://udig.refractions.net
> > http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
> >
> >
>
_______________________________________________
User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig)
http://udig.refractions.net
http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel

Reply via email to