en-us http://www.intensedebate.com/users/72831 Comments by Ben Brinckerhoff http://bbrinck.com/post/2052871267#IDComment113770090 Just testing comments Sat, 4 Dec 2010 22:58:50 +0000 http://bbrinck.com/post/2052871267#IDComment113770090 http://occipital.com/blog/2010/06/23/2010-at-occipital/#IDComment81929054 Congrats! Nobody deserves it more than you guys. Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:53:15 +0000 http://occipital.com/blog/2010/06/23/2010-at-occipital/#IDComment81929054 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/lessons-learned/#IDComment71342980 Customer development is an ongoing process. Once you've identified an MVP (which is an iterative process itself), the next step is to keep iterating as you add or improve features. Measure how the product is performing along key metrics, talk to customers, merge customer feedback with your vision, build and improve features, and then do it all over again! Thu, 29 Apr 2010 18:10:07 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/lessons-learned/#IDComment71342980 http://bbrinck.com/post/551879194#IDComment71126025 That's awesome of him. I'm glad to see more people are thinking about how to accelerate testing. As the tools and techniques get easier and more widespread, it'll definitely help the community overall. Wed, 28 Apr 2010 14:32:00 +0000 http://bbrinck.com/post/551879194#IDComment71126025 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/lessons-learned/#IDComment70732274 Thanks everyone for the words of support. We appreciate it. Mon, 26 Apr 2010 23:11:44 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/lessons-learned/#IDComment70732274 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/lessons-learned/#IDComment70732250 I'll be in town and I'm happy to meet up for a beer. Ping me before you head up to figure out a time/place. See you soon! Mon, 26 Apr 2010 23:11:33 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/lessons-learned/#IDComment70732250 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/closing-up-shop/#IDComment69806258 Hector - Thanks so much for your passionate support for our business. We appreciate it. However, we remain confident that given our current situation, shutting down is the right course of action. We wish you the best of luck with your business. Thu, 22 Apr 2010 20:01:25 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/closing-up-shop/#IDComment69806258 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/closing-up-shop/#IDComment69036492 To everyone I didn't respond to individually - thanks for your words of support! The greatest part of working at Devver has been getting to know and work with so many amazing entrepreneurs and hackers. Like Dan, I'm not sure what is next for me, but I do know I'll take a short break to clear my head before moving on to the next thing. Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:11:18 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/closing-up-shop/#IDComment69036492 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/closing-up-shop/#IDComment69036221 Thanks for all your support, Ryan! We really appreciate it. You're a great asset to the Ruby community. We're investigating the open source route (along with finding a company that could take over Caliper and continue to provide it to the community). There are some complications, we're not yet sure how feasible the OSS route is, but we are looking for any way that Caliper could continue to live on. Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:09:05 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/closing-up-shop/#IDComment69036221 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/closing-up-shop/#IDComment69035911 I think your emails made it to the right place - and we really, really appreciate it. Let's follow up more via email and I'd definitely be game for a Skype chat. Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:06:34 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/closing-up-shop/#IDComment69035911 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/closing-up-shop/#IDComment69035794 Yeah, removing the ties to the community (Gemcutter, rdoc.info), etc makes us especially sad. We're investigating the possibility of open sourcing it. We'll see. Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:05:39 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/closing-up-shop/#IDComment69035794 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/closing-up-shop/#IDComment69035723 We'd like nothing more to keep Caliper going if at all possible. We're investigating our options, including having another company take it over as well as the possibility of open sourcing it. We'll keep everyone updated via this blog. Tue, 20 Apr 2010 18:04:57 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2010/04/closing-up-shop/#IDComment69035723 http://bbrinck.com/post/73830054#IDComment64107765 Glad it's helpful! Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:35:43 +0000 http://bbrinck.com/post/73830054#IDComment64107765 http://devver.net/blog/2010/01/shutting-down-the-devver-test-accelerator/#IDComment50718645 Thanks! Wed, 6 Jan 2010 22:56:19 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2010/01/shutting-down-the-devver-test-accelerator/#IDComment50718645 http://devver.net/blog/2010/01/shutting-down-the-devver-test-accelerator/#IDComment50718607 Sorry, but we aren't planning on open-sourcing that work in the near future because part or all of the technology may eventually return in some form. Wed, 6 Jan 2010 22:55:56 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2010/01/shutting-down-the-devver-test-accelerator/#IDComment50718607 http://devver.net/blog/2009/11/announcing-caliper-community-statistics/#IDComment44724192 Andrew, Unfortunately, neither of those features are available right now, but I'll make a story for each one. Thanks for the great suggestions! Ben Thu, 26 Nov 2009 01:16:49 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2009/11/announcing-caliper-community-statistics/#IDComment44724192 http://devver.net/blog/2009/11/announcing-caliper-community-statistics/#IDComment44724010 Hedge, It's a good question. Right now, forks are double (or triple, etc) counted. That's clearly not ideal. I'll have to think about it more, but my first thought is to aggregate the stats as a group for the purpose of community metrics. I'll make a story to look into this. Thanks! Ben Thu, 26 Nov 2009 01:14:19 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2009/11/announcing-caliper-community-statistics/#IDComment44724010 http://devver.net/blog/2009/08/unit-testing-filesystem-interaction/#IDComment32819828 Ryan, Good questions. 1. We wanted to change the working directory (to the temp dir we've created) because then code like this works as expected: within_construct |c| c.file('foo.txt') assert File.exist?('foo.txt') end But if you don't want to change the working dir (and I have several tests that don't, because of the problems you mentioned), you can pass 'false' to 'within_construct', like this: within_construct(false) do |c| c.file('foo.txt') assert File.exist?(c+'foo.txt') end As for operations that test the full path, I'd recommend a solution like FakeFS, because Construct won't work for this scenario (it simply creates all files in a temp dir and then deletes that temp dir). It certainly would be possible to have a different mode that writes files anywhere, but as you noted, we'd have to be really careful about not overwriting existing files, deleting files correctly, etc. I think in general, it's better to write methods that don't depend on full paths (for testability). 2. Frankly, this is only because I personally think setup/teardown methods are evil (Avdi is slowly starting to convince me it might not be so bad in a system like RSpec that has contexts, but I'm still skeptical). Of course, that's just me. I'll make a ticket to add methods like 'start' and 'stop' that would allow people to use construct in setup/teardown methods. Tue, 1 Sep 2009 22:51:38 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2009/08/unit-testing-filesystem-interaction/#IDComment32819828 http://devver.net/blog/2009/08/unit-testing-filesystem-interaction/#IDComment32593134 Awesome, glad to hear it's helpful! Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:18:17 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2009/08/unit-testing-filesystem-interaction/#IDComment32593134 http://devver.net/blog/2009/08/unit-testing-filesystem-interaction/#IDComment32593028 Yep, we'd implemented two half-assed versions in our code, so we decided to put them together to make something whole :). Sun, 30 Aug 2009 21:18:00 +0000 http://devver.net/blog/2009/08/unit-testing-filesystem-interaction/#IDComment32593028