On Nov 1, 12:02 pm, Steven Hirsch<snhir...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/31/2010 04:52 PM, A2Aviator wrote:
I wish there were something with any of that A2 support that was used
on classic Macs, that way they could be called on the carpet for
breaking functionality instead of maintaining a proper working package.
That would be helpful. It's not that they try to break things, just that they
do not consider A2 users to be of enough importance to actually test code
changes for regression. The AFP "short name" support (ProDOS 8) was always a
poor cousin, but at least the patch was accepted when I sent it in - 12 years ago.
Whatever is broken this time is probably simple, but I suspect that fixing it
will involve the server keeping track of the type of client and using
different logic for maintaining file date depending on whether it's
"conventional" or "short name". That may or may not be so simple, depending
upon the data structures available.
How much work would it be to develop and contribute a small test
harness that validated the behaviour of Apple II specific
functionality ?
It's almost certainly expecting too much for the maintainers to have
setup and working Apple II networks, but a harness that automates an
Apple II-alike client would go a long way towards helping this out.
Perhaps it'd start a trend, and a comprehensive test framework will
end up part of the code, facilitating refactoring and future
development