sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such
- From: Seth Alan Woolley <seth AT positivism.org>
- To: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
- Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 10:31:44 -0700
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 09:27:57AM -0700, Eric Sandall wrote:
>
> Fixed, and you may want to note that not all of those were my fault, but I
> was
> just the last to edit the spells (e.g. gdeskcal), though most of mine we're
> my
> fault. ;) I could always take a break on the grimoire work if my changes are
> too buggy for y'all.
Yeah, I considered the last to edit the fall guy because the last to
edit should have tested their changes first to see if the spell worked.
Maybe many work without an INSTALL file (and that led to false positive
tests) and we should consider removing it for these spells?
And no, you're doing great, you just happen to have made the most edits
so had a higher absolute number of mistakes on this particular measure,
if it's accurate at all. I made the same mistake as well, so I'm really
not trying to blame anybody. :)
Seth
--
Seth Alan Woolley [seth at positivism.org], SPAM/UCE is unauthorized
Key id 00BA3AF3 = 8BE0 A72E A47E A92A 0737 F2FF 7A3F 6D3C 00BA 3AF3
Security Team Member Source Mage GNU/Linux http://www.sourcemage.org
Elected Coordinating Committee Member, Pacific Green Party of Oregon
Attachment:
pgpr05xkuYwrL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
[SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Seth Alan Woolley, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Seth Alan Woolley, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Flavien Bridault, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Andrew, 04/20/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such, Seth Alan Woolley, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Andrew, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Flavien Bridault, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Eric Sandall, 04/20/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such, Arwed von Merkatz, 04/20/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such, Seth Alan Woolley, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 04/20/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] build_api 2 spells that are not marked as such,
Seth Alan Woolley, 04/20/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.