X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=Eh3xnZWqm97ZItf4pm28r5hprcYfJ1arMw/Ej+rFEMw=; b=QsPUT1zK0GRZ2HT9iDrjRCXX283dcjswHoIVVjDPyTcmk/Aqfwf4OmKqqLl3IN6RV6 FTcDt+6TSuZ14/EkUr6Ak12zxEOdXee8cDWy0YsW4z/1H7nIuwhLXTe8RkyHhbGl30VC HQ2k4Kmmbr38K5948uBRimkEZo3pAf//d3LL40HrAiBlAcQ7ke0Q1o/otWx4/u7Sw9gG bRPk97CbsYx8HapF/eFveMFbWRHO/HlHleyWKgF+e1U5NZEGarOKS3chmDoKpV5wwJjc g2eeL3o5XuBof7mMVXa103dPUtidndJjTRv689K9G9PbqLPEN1aHsUmEkT1gRzwDX1lB xxOA== X-Received: by 10.60.171.102 with SMTP id at6mr3940193oec.60.1360187507158; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:51:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [206.220.196.50] In-Reply-To: <201302062025.r16KPdhK013193@envy.delorie.com> References: <20130206073257 DOT GA32216 AT fi DOT muni DOT cz> <201302061959 DOT r16JxEdg011774 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <5112BB62 DOT 5010908 AT xs4all DOT nl> <201302062025 DOT r16KPdhK013193 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> From: Benjamin Bergman Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 15:51:17 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [geda-user] Panelized design To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec54ee094312e4704d51555a8 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmyZ/sRpvF6RgPBHC/pBTE3586puc8fpXCP8lW8yiU7trD6LStKLdY9t15yB1vHzUP+TSKc Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk --bcaec54ee094312e4704d51555a8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Is there any test framework currently in place to help prevent code rot over time? I fully support these plugins being included in pcb. I just worry that if they are not included in the core that they may become neglected. On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:25 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > I could find some time if there is a clear view on which plug-ins to > > merge into pcb. > > I think the "clear view" is to have a separate subdirectory (perhaps > top-level, peer with doc, src, and lib) to hold plugins. Come up with > some conventions, perhaps source file named after each file's only or > primary action, etc. > > As for organization within the plugins area, I have no idea. Pick > something :-) > --bcaec54ee094312e4704d51555a8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Is there any test framework currently in place to help pre= vent code rot over time? I fully support these plugins being included in pc= b. I just worry that if they are not included in the core that they may bec= ome neglected.


On Wed,= Feb 6, 2013 at 2:25 PM, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
=

> I could find some time if there is a clear view on which plug-ins to > merge into pcb.

I think the "clear view" is to have a separate subdirectory= (perhaps
top-level, peer with doc, src, and lib) to hold plugins. =A0Come up with some conventions, perhaps source file named after each file's only or primary action, etc.

As for organization within the plugins area, I have no idea. =A0Pick
something :-)

--bcaec54ee094312e4704d51555a8--