Re: SwapBill embedded protocol: preview and request for feedback
Hi Graham,
> Unit tests and coverage reports would go some way towards countering the project's current overall ambience of mad scientist code dump.
There *are* a load of automated tests for SwapBill, in fact, including a host abstraction layer, and this all results in pretty good coverage.
This part of the project is excluded from the public release, however, at this time.
> To be brutal, it's unfinished and advertises itself as such. A lack of polish and inadequate documentation exacerbate the unfinished feel and together, all three form the primary cause of the low level of interest expressed.
Brutal is good, but do you have any more specific suggestions for adding polish, or improving on the current documentation (which can be found here: http://swapbill.readthedocs.org/en/latest/)?
> Unit tests and coverage reports would go some way towards countering the project's current overall ambience of mad scientist code dump.
There *are* a load of automated tests for SwapBill, in fact, including a host abstraction layer, and this all results in pretty good coverage.
This part of the project is excluded from the public release, however, at this time.
> To be brutal, it's unfinished and advertises itself as such. A lack of polish and inadequate documentation exacerbate the unfinished feel and together, all three form the primary cause of the low level of interest expressed.
Brutal is good, but do you have any more specific suggestions for adding polish, or improving on the current documentation (which can be found here: http://swapbill.readthedocs.org/en/latest/)?