Search Results

Search found 30312 results on 1213 pages for 'tactial test team'.

Page 140/1213 | < Previous Page | 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147  | Next Page >

• Play Your Position Until the Play Breaks Down&hellip;then Do Whatever it Takes.

  - by AjarnMark

  If I didn’t know better, I would think that K. Brian Kelley (blog | twitter) has been listening in on conversations with my boss. In his recent blog post Successful Teams: Knowing When to Step Out of Your Role, Brian describes quite clearly a philosophy that my boss has been trying to get across to everyone in the department.  We have been using sports analogies, like how important it is to play your position, until the play breaks down (such as a fumble) and then do whatever it takes it to cover each other / recover the ball / win.  While we like having very skilled people who could do a lot of different tasks, it is important that you first do your assigned tasks, and only once those are complete, or failure of the larger mission is probable, do you consider walking away from them to help someone else with their responsibilities. The thing that you cannot afford, especially on a lean team, is the really nice guy who is always trying to help out other people, but in doing so, is never quite getting his own responsibilities taken care of.  Yes, if the Running Back drops the football, you want any member of the team in the vicinity to jump on it, whether that is the leading blocker or the Quarterback.  But until the fumble happens, you want the leading blocker to focus on doing his job, and block for the Running Back.  If the blocker is doing any other job than his primary responsibility, you’re probably going to lose. This sounds logical enough, but it is really easy to go astray with the best of intentions.  This is especially true on a small, tight-knit team, where it is really easy to get sucked into someone else’s task or problem, doubly so if you think you can do it better or faster than them.  Now you are really setting yourself up for failure.  The right thing is to let the other person do the job, even if it seems less efficient in the short-run, so that you can focus on the tasks which require your expertise.  Don’t break formation…don’t abandon your assignment, until it is clear that mission failure is imminent, and even then, as Brian writes, it should be with the agreement of the mission leader. Thanks, Brian, for putting it so well.  This has been distributed throughout our department.

  Read the article

• How important is to sacriface your free time for accomplishing goals? [closed]

  - by Darf Zon

  I was reading a book about XP programming and about agile teams. While I was reading, I saw this scenario. I've never worked with a development team (just in school). So I would like what do you opine on this situation: Your boss has asked you to deliver software in a time that can only be possible to meet the project team asking if you want to work overtime without pay. All team members have young children. Discuss whether it should accept this request from your boss or should persuade the team to give their time to the organization rather than their families. What could be significant factors in the decision? As a programmer, you are offered an upgrade as project manager, but his feeling is that you can have a more effective contribution in a technical role in one administrative. Write when you should accept that promotion. Somethimes, I sacrifice my free time for accomplishing hits at work, so it's very important to me to know your opinion base of your experience.

  Read the article

• Unit and Integration testing: How can it become a reflex

  - by LordOfThePigs

  All the programmers in my team are familiar with unit testing and integration testing. We have all worked with it. We have all written tests with it. Some of us even have felt an improved sense of trust in his/her own code. However, for some reason, writing unit/integration tests has not become a reflex for any of the members of the team. None of us actually feel bad when not writing unit tests at the same time as the actual code. As a result, our codebase is mostly uncovered by unit tests, and projects enter production untested. The problem with that, of course is that once your projects are in production and are already working well, it is virtually impossible to obtain time and/or budget to add unit/integration testing. The members of my team and myself are already familiar with the value of unit testing (1, 2) but it doesn't seem to help bringing unit testing into our natural workflow. In my experience making unit tests and/or a target coverage mandatory just results in poor quality tests and slows down team members simply because there is no self-generated motivation to produce these tests. Also as soon as pressure eases, unit tests are not written any more. My question is the following: Is there any methods that you have experimented with that helps build a dynamic/momentum inside the team, leading to people naturally wanting to create and maintain those tests?

  Read the article

• Editor's Notebook: Of Slobber Pots and Flux Capacitors

  - by user462779

  Just wrapping up the contents of the November 2012 issue of Profit... I found this snippet of an interview I did with Team Oracle mechanics Clyde Greene and Chad Colberg when I was in Gary, IN this summer working on a photo shoot about Team Oracle for the current issue. We were standing around in a hangar as the Team prepared for the Chicago Air and Water Show, chatting about the engineering and design of the Oracle Challenger III aerobatic plane. Pick up a copy of Profit's November 2012 and read what Team Oracle pilot Sean D. Tucker has to say about the Oracle Challenger III and get a closer look at the plane. I'll drop a link into this blog entry as soon as the story is available. Your editor, greasy and stooped after a red eye flight, talks with Sean D. Tucker about stunt flying.

  Read the article

• Charles Barkley syndrome

  - by dacracot

  Charles Barkley was an excellent basketball player, a hall of fame, and a dream team member. He played for the 76ers, Suns, and Rockets. Yet he never won an NBA championship. Some might argue this was because he was never surrounded by other players of his caliber, and in the NBA, you can't win on your own. So what does this have to do with programming? How many of you out there feel like Sir Charles? Leading your team in every category, KLOCs, bugs fixed, systems configured... Always the one pushing for improvements, upgrading systems, negotiating with customers... Feeling like you are carrying the team. Anger just under the surface. Only to retire eventually, without "the ring"1. 1: Keep in mind, Charles never blamed his team. He just performed at his best.

  Read the article

• PASS: 2013 Summit Location

  - by Bill Graziano

  HQ recently posted a brief update on our search for a location for 2013.  It includes links to posts by four Board members and two community members. I’d like to add my thoughts to the mix and ask you a question.  But I can’t give you a real understanding without telling you some history first. So far we’ve had the Summit in Chicago, San Francisco, Orlando, Dallas, Denver and Seattle.  Each has a little different feel and distinct memories.  I enjoyed getting drinks by the pool in Orlando after the sessions ended.  I didn’t like that our location in Dallas was so far away from all the nightlife.  Denver was in downtown but we had real challenges with hotels.  I enjoyed the different locations.  I always enjoyed the announcement during the third keynote with the location of the next Summit. There are two big events that impacted my thinking on the Summit location.  The first was our transition to the new management company in early 2007.  The event that September in Denver was put on with a six month planning cycle by a brand new headquarters staff.  It wasn’t perfect but came off much better than I had dared to hope.  It also moved us out of the cookie cutter conferences that we used to do into a model where we have a lot more control.  I think you’ll all agree that the production values of our last few Summits have been fantastic.  That Summit also led to our changing relationship with Microsoft.  Microsoft holds two seats on the PASS Board.  All the PASS Board members face the same challenge: we all have full-time jobs and PASS comes in second place professionally (or sometimes further back).  Starting in 2008 we were assigned a liaison from Microsoft that had a much larger block of time to coordinate with us.  That changed everything between PASS and Microsoft.  Suddenly we were talking to product marketing, Microsoft PR, their event team, the Tech*Ed team, the education division, their user group team and their field sales team – locally and internationally.  We strengthened our relationship with CSS, SQLCAT and the engineering teams.  We had exposure at the executive level that we’d never had before.  And their level of participation at the Summit changed from under 100 people to 400-500 people.  I think those 400+ Microsoft employees have value at a conference on Microsoft SQL Server.  For the first time, Seattle had a real competitive advantage over other cities. I’m one that looked very hard at staying in Seattle for a long, long time.  I think those Microsoft engineers have value to our attendees.  I think the increased support that Microsoft can provide when we’re in Seattle has value to our attendees.  But that doesn’t tell the whole story.  There’s a significant (and vocal!) percentage of our membership that wants the Summit outside Seattle.  Post-2007 PASS doesn’t know what it’s like to have a Summit outside of Seattle.  I think until we have a Summit in another city we won’t really know the trade-offs. I think a model where we move every third or every other year is interesting.  But until we have another Summit outside Seattle and we can evaluate the logistics and how important it is to have depth and variety in our Microsoft participation we won’t really know. Another benefit that comes with a move is variety or diversity.  I learn more when I’m exposed to new things and new people.  I believe that moving the Summit will give a different set of people an opportunity to attend. Grant Fritchey writes “It seems that the board is leaning, extremely heavily, towards making it a permanent fixture in Seattle.”  I don’t believe that’s true.  I know there was discussion of that earlier but I don’t believe it’s true now. And that brings me to my question.  Do we announce the city now or do we wait until the 2012 Summit?  I’m happy to announce Seattle vs. not-Seattle as soon as we sign the contract.  But I’d like to leave the actual city announcement until the 2011 Summit.  I like the drama and mystery of it.  I also like that it doesn’t give you a reason to skip a Summit and wait for the next one if it’s closer or back in Seattle.  The other side of the coin is that your planning is easier if you know where it is.  What do you think?

  Read the article

• Wearables and UX Innovation: En Español y Inglés

  - by ultan o'broin

  Good examples of Oracle's commitment to tech diversity and to innovation can be seen everywhere. Here's a couple of videos from the Oracle Applications User Experience (UX) team, featuring Sarahi Mireles (@sarahimireles) and Noel Portugal (@noelportugal) who work together on some very cool stuff. The videos are available on the Oracle Technology Network Architecture (OTNArchBeat) Community Video Channel on YouTube. Sarahi and Noel show you how cool people work together on some awesome innovations, worldwide. Sarahi Mireles showing off a Spanish language Pebble watch Facebook notification. The videos are in Spanish and English and feature the latest in wearable technology that the UX team is exploring and that UX team members themselves love to use. Check out what they have to say in your preferred language. Manos libres y vista al frente: Con el futuro puesto Heads Up and Hands Free: Wearing the Future Interested in knowing more or joining us? Find out more on Facebook about the Oracle Applications User Experience team and the Oracle Mexico Development Center.

  Read the article

• Cannot connect puppet agent to puppet master

  - by u123

  I have installed puppet 3.3.1 on a debian 7 machine (test-puppet-master) and the puppet agent on another debian 7 machine (test-puppet-agent/192.11.80.246) acting as a client. I start the master with: puppet master --verbose --no-daemonize And I start the agent with: puppet agent --server=test-puppet-master --no-daemonize --verbose Notice: Did not receive certificate which gives the following output on the master: Notice: Starting Puppet master version 3.3.1 Error: Could not resolve 192.11.80.246: no name for 192.11.80.246 Info: Inserting default '~ ^/catalog/([^/]+)$' (auth true) ACL Info: Inserting default '~ ^/node/([^/]+)$' (auth true) ACL Info: Inserting default '/file' (auth ) ACL Info: Inserting default '/certificate_revocation_list/ca' (auth true) ACL Info: Inserting default '~ ^/report/([^/]+)$' (auth true) ACL Info: Inserting default '/certificate/ca' (auth any) ACL Info: Inserting default '/certificate/' (auth any) ACL Info: Inserting default '/certificate_request' (auth any) ACL Info: Inserting default '/status' (auth true) ACL Info: Not Found: Could not find certificate test-puppet-agent Error: Could not resolve 192.11.80.246: no name for 192.11.80.246 Info: Not Found: Could not find certificate test-puppet-agent Error: Could not resolve 192.11.80.246: no name for 192.11.80.246 Info: Not Found: Could not find certificate test-puppet-agent Any ideas why the agent cannot connect?

  Read the article

• Squeeze/Lenny compilation : Library Link error

  - by PEZ

  I've got a problem here : I have a C++ Library ("DataTsBroad") and a C++ Test app ("DataTsBroadTest"), to test it. Actually, the Lib and the Test app are both compiled an a Debian Lenny. Now, i want to continue to compile my Test app on a Debian Lenny (customer constraint), but i would compile my lib on a Squeeze or a Wheezy to work on the last Debian releases. So, i successfully compiled my Lib on a Squeeze, But, after, when i try to compile my Test app with this Lib on the Lenny, it fails ! There is a Link Error : Linking CXX executable DataTsBroadTest /home/nis/pezierg/test/ProductMak/Export/DataTsBroad/L64/Release/libDataTsBroad64.so: undefined reference to `std::ctype::_M_widen_init() const@GLIBCXX_3.4.11' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status make[2]: *** [DataTsBroadTest] Error 1 make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/DataTsBroadTest.dir/all] Error 2 make: * [all] Error 2 The problem is certainly due to ostream C++ Lib, I tried to comment all it's uses in my Lib and it works. But how can i really fix the problem ?

  Read the article

• Development teams do not scale

  - by Matt Watson

  Recently I have been thinking about how development teams don't scale very well. The bigger a team and the product get, the more time the team spends fixing software bugs. This means they spend more time doing troubleshooting and debugging as the grow. The problem is that since developers don't typically have access to production servers, there is a bottleneck in the process when doing production troubleshooting.For a team that has 10 developers, I would guess than 0-2 of them have access to production servers. If that team grows to 20 people, it is probably the same 0-2 people that have production access still. This means that those 2 key people are a bottleneck and the team does not scale correctly as you add more resources. All those new developers want is to help track down and fix software bugs, but they don't have the visibility to do it. So they end up being less productive and frustrated because they really want to fix the problems. The people who do have production access end up spending too much of their time doing troubleshooting instead of working on new projects.The solution is to remove the bottlenecks and get those people working on more important tasks. Stackify can solve this problem by giving all the developers read only access to production servers. This allows them to access the information they need to do troubleshooting on their own.

  Read the article

• OpenJDK 6 B24 Available

  - by user9158633

  On November 16, 2011 the source bundle for OpenJDK 6 b24 was published at http://download.java.net/openjdk/jdk6/. The main changes in b24 are the latest round of security updates (e.g. the security changes in jdk repo) and a few other fixes.  For more information see the detailed list of all the changes in OpenJDK 6 B24. Test Results: All the jdk regression tests run with  make test passed. cd jdk6 make make test Per Kelly's  B23 Release blog: The new process is - all the jdk regression tests run with make test should just pass. Over time we will fix the tests that have been excluded, possibly add more tests, and exclude tests that fail to demonstrate stability (with a bug filed against the test). For the current list of excluded tests see  jdk6/jdk/test/ProblemList.txt file: ProblemList.html in B24  |  Latest ProblemList.txt (in the tip revision). Special thanks to Kelly O'Hair for his direction and Dave Katleman for his Release Engineering work.

  Read the article

• Scrum: What if the Product Owner has tasks?

  - by Lauren J

  I have just started working with a team that has picked up some aspects of Scrum (two week timeboxing) but not others (the team does not currently agree to all estimates or to the number of points in a sprint, but I'll change this soon.) The product owner is also a technical resource (scientist) with some development background. Is it appropriate to have the product owner's tasks (which mostly involve research) mixed in with the team's tasks (some of which are research and some development).

  Read the article

• Node.JS testing with Jasmine, databases, and pre-existing code

  - by Jim Rubenstein

  I've recently built the start of a core system which is likely going turn into a monster product. I'm building the system with node.js, and decided after I got a small base built, that It'd be a great idea to start using some sort of automated test suite to test the application. I decided to use jasmine, as it seems pretty solid and has a lot of features for stubbing spying and mocking methods and classes. The application has a lot of external data stores and api access (kestrel, mysql, mongodb, facebook, and more). My issue is, I've got a good amount of code written that I want to start testing - as it represents the underpinnings of the application. What are the best practices for testing methods/classes that access external APIs that I may or may not have control over? As an example, I have a data structure that fetches a bunch of data from a MySQL database. I want to test the method that retrieves the data; and I'm not sure how to go about it. I could test the fetch method which is supposed to return an array of objects, but to isolate the method from the database, I need to define my own fixture data. So what I end up doing is stubbing the mysql execution, and returning a static dataset. So, I end up writing a function that returns the dataset that makes my test pass. That doesn't seem to actually test the code, other than verifying a method is being called. I know this is kind of abstract and vague, it seems that the idea of testing is very much abstract though, so hopefully someone has some experience and can guide me in the right direction. Any advice, or reading I can do is more than welcomed. Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• TFS Hosting: discountasp.net TFS

  - by Enrique Lima

  In the last month or so I have been able to test and experience first hand the offering from discountasp.net for hosted TFS 2010. This first part is a description of the setup process for the account itself and getting some additional information on what you will find through the portal on their site. Not long ago, I posted a little tidbit on hosting TFS.  Through it I also did a shameless plug to my employer, our services and the type of hosting we recommend.  So, wouldn’t me running on discountasp.net be an issue?  Actually? NO. Ok, enough rambling.  Let’s get some details here. It is a Software as a Service model.  Through it we get Source Control, Version Control, Work Item Tracking and such.  What about Build?  If your need includes Build Management and such, you may need to look at some other options.  But, still this is a great offering for those that are moving from SourceSafe.  Or organizations who have 3 to 5 developers on staff, and do not foresee getting larger anytime soon.  Can it support more than 5 developers?  Yes, but then we need to get into how are you using TFS.  Do you need more than just Basic?  For example, SharePoint and Reporting Services integration. The signup process was seamless! Very easy to follow, complete and transition to Visual Studio to start working. An email followed the signup process, it contained details on how to get to the Team Foundation Server Control Panel login.  Once there, here is what I saw after the initial setup process of naming my Team Project Collection: So, moving on … once I clicked the area to get my server info, I got the following: Then it was a matter of getting the first user in there: Then on to connecting Visual Studio to my hosted TFS. Getting the server information, and the user account created I will configure those options in Visual Studio. Using Team Explorer, I am adding a new server configuration. Once this is provided, click OK, I will be challenged for a username and password, provide them and you will land on the following screen. Then Click Close. You will now be connected to your server and Team Project Collection. Since this will likely be the first time connecting, you will have no Projects (I already have 2 going). Click Connect, and you will be back in Team Explorer. My next post in the topic will be on Creating your First Team Project and uploading a Project Template to the server.

  Read the article

• Core debugger enhancements in VS2010

  Since my team offers "parallel debugging", we refer to the team delivering all the other debugging features as the "core debugger" team. They have published a video of new VS2010 debugger features that I encourage you to watch to find out about enhancements with DataTips, breakpoints, dump debugging (inc. IL interpreter) and Threads window.The raw list of features with short description is also here. Comments about this post welcome at the original blog.

  Read the article

• Update: TFS Power Tools March 2011

  - by Enrique Lima

  There is an update available for the TFS Power Tools and the TFS Build Power Tools. Among the updates to the Tools: Changes to the Team Foundation Server Backups Add-In for TFS Admin Console. Added functionality to the Windows Shell Extension. Changes to the tfpt command line tool that allows you to script build management commands. For a full detail of the changes, read Brian Harry’s post  http://blogs.msdn.com/b/bharry/archive/2011/03/03/mar-11-team-foundation-server-power-tools-are-available.aspx To download the Power Tools: Team Foundation Server Power Tools Team Foundation Server Build Extensions Power Tool

  Read the article

• Do we need to adopt a black-box asset our project is inheriting from its predecessor?

  - by Tom Anderson

  Our client has an eCommerce site which was developed by an in-house team, and is now showing its age. I work for a firm brought in as external contractors to build a replacement. Part of the current site is a Flash viewer applet which displays media about the product - zoom-able images, 360-degree views, movies, and so on. We need to show the same media the current site does, so we are simply reusing the viewer. The viewer is embedded on a page in the usual way, and told what media to show by means of an XML file it loads from our server, which is pretty simple for us to generate. We've got this working; it was pretty straightforward. But what else do we need to do? The thing is, as far as we're concerned, the viewer is a binary blob which is served from the client's content-distribution network. We embed it, feed it some XML, and it does its job, but we have no power over its internals. It's completely opaque to us - a black box. We can use it to do what it does, but we can't change it, so if we ever need to do something different, we're stuffed. We're building this site for the client, and when we're done, we'll hand it over for them to maintain. We won't be doing the maintenance ourselves. There's a small team within the client who are working as part of our team, and who will be the ones doing the maintenance. That team only includes one person from the team that built the old site, and it's not someone who knows the image viewer. The people who do know the image viewer are not slated to join our team when our system replaces theirs - they'll be moved to other projects. The documentation on the viewer is extremely thin, and as far as i know doesn't cover the internals at all. My worry is that if someone doesn't take some positive action, all knowledge of the internal workings of the viewer - even down to where the source code for it is - will be lost. It's possible it already has been. Is this something to worry about? If so, whose job is it to worry about it? What should they do about it once they've got worried?

  Read the article

• Group Matchmaking

  - by Simon Kérouack

  Consider different groups(1 or more players) queuing together, we want to make 2 opposing teams containing each the same amount of players while keeping the groups together. At the same time we want to make both teams' average ranking as close as possible. Now also consider we have as a working set the subset of groups currently queuing within a given ranking range. For an example, let's say we have the following groups, ordered by queuing time: Id, playerCount, totalRank, avgRank 0, 3, 126, 42 1, 2, 60, 30 2, 1, 25, 25 3, 2, 80, 40 4, 1, 40, 40 5, 1, 20, 20 6, 3, 150, 50 for this specific subset, the expected output should ideally be: team1: 0, 1 (total: 186) team2: 2, 5, 6 (total: 195) up to now the solution I have been using is to balance out each team by making each team pick the group with highest ranking within the subset turn by turn. The team who picks is the one with the currently lowest average rank unless one is already full. If one team is already full the other team tries to complete itself with groups that would make the rank gap as small as possible. This solution turns out to have issues with frequent edge cases and I'm looking for a better solution, or some fine-tuning that could be made. In most cases, players seems to want teams of 5 people and queue in group of 2. Our average subset when 2 teams of 5 are chosen is made of about 14 players if that may be of any help.

  Read the article

• How to represent an agile project to people focused on waterfall [closed]

  - by ahsteele

  Our team has been asked to represent our development efforts in a project plan. No one is unhappy with our work or questioning our ability to deliver, we are just participating in an IT cattle call for project plans. Trouble is we are an agile team and haven't thought about our work in terms of a formal project plan. While we have a general idea of what we are working on next we aren't 100% sure until we plan an iteration. Until now our team has largely operated in a vacuum and has not been required to present our methodology or metrics to outside parties. We follow most of the practices espoused in Extreme Programming. We hold quarterly planning meetings to have a general idea of the stories we are going to work on for a quarter. That said, our stories are documented on 3x5 cards and are only estimated at the beginning of the iteration in which they are going to be worked. After estimation we document the story in Team Foundation Sever. During an iteration, we attach code to stories and mark stories as completed once finished. From this data we are able to generate burn down and velocity charts. Most importantly we know our average velocity for an iteration keeping us from biting off more than we can chew. I am not looking to modify the way we do development but want to present our development activities in a report that someone only familiar with waterfall will understand. In What Does an Agile Project Plan Look Like, Kent McDonald does a good job laying out the differences between agile and waterfall project plans. He specifies the differences in consumable bullets: An agile project plan is feature based An Agile Project Plan is organized into iterations An Agile Project Plan has different levels of detail depending on the time frame An Agile Project Plan is owned by the Team Being able to explain the differences is great, but how best to present the data?

  Read the article

• make IIS 7.5 cache static content files over diferent pages

  - by Achilles

  On a Windows 2008 R2, using DNS and IIS I've established my development test server; i.e. I'll have a web application that I can browse on http://test.dev I've moved all the static content files like images, js files and css files into another application which is visible on http://cdn.test.dev test.dev, uses cdn.test.dev urls like http://cdn.test.dev/js/jquery.js to load js, css and images. When I first load "~/" of test.dev, all files will load with a response code of 200; when I press F5 in Firefox, all files, except the "~/default.aspx", will load with 304 response code; but pressing Ctrl+F5 loads them again with a 200 code; if I browse another url like "~/pages/" in test.dev, all of those static files will reload with a 200 code... Is this normal or I'm doing something wrong? Actually, I'm looking for a behavior like this: I want the client to load http://cdn.test.dev/js/jquery.js, only once. I want the client's browser to use this jquery.js file, from cache, in all other pages of test.dev Is this possible? This is the web.config file I have in the root directory of cdn.test.dev: <configuration> <system.webServer> <caching> <profiles> <add extension=".png" policy="CacheUntilChange" varyByHeaders="User-Agent" location="Client" /> <add extension=".gif" policy="CacheUntilChange" varyByHeaders="User-Agent" location="Client" /> <add extension=".jpg" policy="CacheUntilChange" varyByHeaders="User-Agent" location="Client" /> <add extension=".js" policy="CacheUntilChange" varyByHeaders="User-Agent" location="Client" /> <add extension=".css" policy="CacheUntilChange" varyByHeaders="User-Agent" location="Client" /> <add extension=".axd" kernelCachePolicy="CacheUntilChange" varyByHeaders="User-Agent" location="Client" /> </profiles> </caching> <httpProtocol allowKeepAlive="true"> <customHeaders> <add name="Cache-Control" value="public, max-age=31536000" /> </customHeaders> </httpProtocol> <validation validateIntegratedModeConfiguration="false" /> <modules runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true"> <remove name="RadUploadModule" /> <remove name="RadCompression" /> <add name="RadUploadModule" type="Telerik.Web.UI.RadUploadHttpModule" preCondition="integratedMode" /> <add name="RadCompression" type="Telerik.Web.UI.RadCompression" preCondition="integratedMode" /> </modules> <handlers> <remove name="ChartImage_axd" /> <remove name="Telerik_Web_UI_SpellCheckHandler_axd" /> <remove name="Telerik_Web_UI_DialogHandler_aspx" /> <remove name="Telerik_RadUploadProgressHandler_ashx" /> <remove name="Telerik_Web_UI_WebResource_axd" /> <add name="ChartImage_axd" path="ChartImage.axd" type="Telerik.Web.UI.ChartHttpHandler" verb="*" preCondition="integratedMode" /> <add name="Telerik_Web_UI_SpellCheckHandler_axd" path="Telerik.Web.UI.SpellCheckHandler.axd" type="Telerik.Web.UI.SpellCheckHandler" verb="*" preCondition="integratedMode" /> <add name="Telerik_Web_UI_DialogHandler_aspx" path="Telerik.Web.UI.DialogHandler.aspx" type="Telerik.Web.UI.DialogHandler" verb="*" preCondition="integratedMode" /> <add name="Telerik_RadUploadProgressHandler_ashx" path="Telerik.RadUploadProgressHandler.ashx" type="Telerik.Web.UI.RadUploadProgressHandler" verb="*" preCondition="integratedMode" /> <add name="Telerik_Web_UI_WebResource_axd" path="Telerik.Web.UI.WebResource.axd" type="Telerik.Web.UI.WebResource" verb="*" preCondition="integratedMode" /> </handlers> <security> <requestFiltering> <requestLimits maxAllowedContentLength="10485760" /> </requestFiltering> </security> <staticContent> <clientCache cacheControlMode="UseExpires" httpExpires="Wed, 01 Jan 2020 00:00:00 GMT"/> </staticContent> </system.webServer> <appSettings /> <system.web> <compilation debug="false" targetFramework="4.0" /> <pages> <controls> <add tagPrefix="telerik" namespace="Telerik.Web.UI" assembly="Telerik.Web.UI" /> </controls> </pages> <httpHandlers> <add path="ChartImage.axd" type="Telerik.Web.UI.ChartHttpHandler" verb="*" validate="false" /> <add path="Telerik.Web.UI.SpellCheckHandler.axd" type="Telerik.Web.UI.SpellCheckHandler" verb="*" validate="false" /> <add path="Telerik.Web.UI.DialogHandler.aspx" type="Telerik.Web.UI.DialogHandler" verb="*" validate="false" /> <add path="Telerik.RadUploadProgressHandler.ashx" type="Telerik.Web.UI.RadUploadProgressHandler" verb="*" validate="false" /> <add path="Telerik.Web.UI.WebResource.axd" type="Telerik.Web.UI.WebResource" verb="*" validate="false" /> </httpHandlers> <httpModules> <add name="RadUploadModule" type="Telerik.Web.UI.RadUploadHttpModule" /> <add name="RadCompression" type="Telerik.Web.UI.RadCompression" /> </httpModules> <httpRuntime maxRequestLength="10240" /> </system.web> </configuration> and this is the resulting response header for http://cdn.test.dev/css/global.css: Cache-Control: private,public, max-age=31536000 Content-Type: text/css Content-Encoding: gzip Expires: Wed, 01 Jan 2020 00:00:00 GMT Last-Modified: Mon, 06 Sep 2010 08:53:06 GMT Accept-Ranges: bytes Etag: "0454eca04dcb1:0" Vary: Accept-Encoding Server: Microsoft-IIS/7.5 X-Powered-By: ASP.NET Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2010 14:57:08 GMT Content-Length: 4495

  Read the article

• Please help me decide if I should I change jobs [closed]

  - by KindaNewbie

  About me: I am very entrepreneurial and believe I would do well working solo as a consultant and possibly hiring help. I do want to do that at some point. I love to learn and a good challenge. Please help me make this decision! Current job (I am there for about 4 years): Pros: secure job good pay (I guess I am 80 percentile for my level/geographical area) large corporation - main business is not software excellent health insurance for low cost to me, pension, 401k matching, 6 weeks paid time off per year small dev team use of latest technologies (mostly WPF/silverlight) low supervision (I can do personal things all the time) I get to do a lot of moonlighting and my goal was to go solo full-time in a year or so. Cons: small team of non-professional devs 50% of my time I do things I don't enjoy projects are not meaningful to the organization If I left it wouldn't be too hard for them - business would resume as usual. Nobody besides my small team of 3 has any idea about software development whatsoever. Prospect job: Pros: small/agile software company same salary as current job same size dev team but all are very sharp (I would probably be the weakest of the team in the beginning) technology used is outside my comfort zone (latest cool web technolgies such as html5/jquery/...) - I am not a web dev and they know that. ton of learning opportunity Start-up - possibility of stock option/partial ownership of some sort Cons: Small office space - not able to do personal things as often (may be pro) No room for moonlighting less benefits (but salary can compensate for that)

  Read the article

• Office arangement - comfort vs. teamwork?

  - by finrod

  Our team works in an open-space office. Luckily the cubicles are quite big (L shaped tables for everyone!), there is quite a lot of space so we are not sandwiched. Without going into further detail, there are comfortable spots (window), normal spots and stupid spots (near the corridor). Until recently, the development team of twelve engineers was seated so that all types of spots were occupied and we were all close together. In the old arrangement, verbal communication was very easy - half of the team was withing talking distance. The other half was like ten steps away. Often times I could ask, discuss, solve problems without leaving the cube. Most of the communication is work related, no bullshit or mental masturbation that would unnecessarily distract others. Now we have moved to another part of the building and have larger space to occupy. At this point, everyone could pick their spot. Naturally all stupid spots are left empty (for the poor newcomers to occupy bwehaha). In the new arrangement, the development team is stretched across the floor and some of the key engineers are seated 'far' from each other - definitely not within talking distance. I have yet to experience how this works out but am getting concerned that team work and communication may have been traded for personal comfort. Finally the questions... What do you think is better office arrangement? Such that allows for free verbal communication but trading for some developer's comfort, or such that potentially hinders verbal communication but makes developer's more comfortable in their spot? Or maybe it does not matter at all and we will evolve to be efficient in any arrangement? What is your personal experience? Note - yes I read books and posts how workplace is important in our job. However in this case - we are all still in open space and the difference between the different spots are not really groundbreaking. So I'm thinking the little comfort that few developers gain is not worth the loss of easy communication.

  Read the article

• Mount CIFS share with autofs

  - by Phanto

  I have a system running RHEL 5.5, and I am trying to mount a Windows share on a server using autofs. (Due to the network not being ready upon startup, I do not want to utilize fstab.) I am able to mount the shares manually, but autofs is just not mounting them. Here are the files I am working with: At the end of /etc/auto.master, I have: ## Mount this test share: /test /etc/auto.test --timeout=60 In /etc/auto.test, I have: test -fstype=cifs,username=testuser,domain=domain.com,password=password ://server/test I then restart the autofs service. However, this does not work. ls-ing the directory does not return any results. I have followed all these guides on the web, and I either don't understand them, or they.just.don't.work. Thank You

  Read the article

• to measure throughput of testing device connect to server via AP

  - by samantha

  Description of project- I have a test tool to which DUT connects. The test tool has an access point in it and once DUT get connected to it via mac address we check RSSI and some other features of WiFi of DUT. Now I am wondering is there is any way I can measure throughput of Device under test via mac address of DUT from server side. Test-tool has LINUX fedora 11 in it and major coding is done in c/C++ and json command. Previously, I have tried to install ftp server on test-tool and DUT can connect to it and we can measure the throughput or data transfer rate, but this is not feasible solution as it requires lot of intervention from DUT. What I am interested in is 1) To run some script on server side /test tool and it gives me throughput of bandwidth of connected device may be via mac address of DUT OR 2) Server script transfer some files/packets to DUT and we can measure the throughput. Coding is not a major challenge at this stage , I just need some tool which requires minimum intervention from DUT.

  Read the article

• Does unit testing lead to premature generalization (specifically in the context of C++)?

  - by Martin

  Preliminary notes I'll not go into the distinction of the different kinds of test there are, there are already a few questions on these sites regarding that. I'll take what's there and that says: unit testing in the sense of "testing the smallest isolatable unit of an application" from which this question actually derives The isolation problem What is the smallest isolatable unit of a program. Well, as I see it, it (highly?) depends on what language you are coding in. Micheal Feathers talks about the concept of a seam: [WEwLC, p31] A seam is a place where you can alter behavior in your program without editing in that place. And without going into the details, I understand a seam -- in the context of unit testing -- to be a place in a program where your "test" can interface with your "unit". Examples Unit test -- especially in C++ -- require from the code under test to add more seams that would be strictly called for for a given problem. Example: Adding a virtual interface where non-virtual implementation would have been sufficient Splitting -- generalizing(?) -- a (smallish) class further "just" to facilitate adding a test. Splitting a single-executable project into seemingly "independent" libs, "just" to facilitate compiling them independently for the tests. The question I'll try a few versions that hopefully ask about the same point: Is the way that Unit Tests require one to structure an application's code "only" beneficial for the unit tests or is it actually beneficial to the applications structure. Is the generalization code need to exhibit to be unit-testable useful for anything but the unit tests? Does adding unit tests force one to generalize unnecessarily? Is the shape unit tests force on code "always" also a good shape for the code in general as seen from the problem domain? I remember a rule of thumb that said don't generalize until you need to / until there's a second place that uses the code. With Unit Tests, there's always a second place that uses the code -- namely the unit test. So is this reason enough to generalize?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147  | Next Page >