<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for the tar pit</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.goneopen.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.goneopen.com</link>
	<description>Thrashing around in the stickiness of software</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 04:14:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Sharepoint &amp; TDD: Getting started advice by todd</title>
		<link>http://blog.goneopen.com/2011/07/sharepoint-tdd-getting-started/comment-page-1/#comment-2014</link>
		<dc:creator>todd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 04:14:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.goneopen.com/2011/07/sharepoint-tdd-getting-started/#comment-2014</guid>
		<description>Bart,

Thanks. Yes, the top one was the one I was looking for..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bart,</p>
<p>Thanks. Yes, the top one was the one I was looking for..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Sharepoint &amp; TDD: Getting started advice by Bart</title>
		<link>http://blog.goneopen.com/2011/07/sharepoint-tdd-getting-started/comment-page-1/#comment-2013</link>
		<dc:creator>Bart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2011 05:32:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.goneopen.com/2011/07/sharepoint-tdd-getting-started/#comment-2013</guid>
		<description>Hi Todd,

Perhaps you were looking for these links where Microsoft recommends use of the Repository pattern in SharePoint:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff649690.aspx
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd458798.aspx</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Todd,</p>
<p>Perhaps you were looking for these links where Microsoft recommends use of the Repository pattern in SharePoint:</p>
<p><a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff649690.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff649690.aspx</a><br />
<a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd458798.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd458798.aspx</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Of course agile is a fad by todd</title>
		<link>http://blog.goneopen.com/2008/08/of-course-agile-is-a-fad/comment-page-1/#comment-1914</link>
		<dc:creator>todd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Oct 2011 01:58:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.goneopen.com/2008/08/of-course-agile-is-a-fad/#comment-1914</guid>
		<description>@John. Funny btu just a little more cynical than the point I was making. I was more one that the transformative aspects of agile as a radical practice will get consumed into commonsense. This will have a dual affect of both shifting practice  making it &quot;better&quot; (we see this with TDD &amp; CI and to a lesser extent Pair Programming) and rounding the edges (which is closer to your video)

--tb</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@John. Funny btu just a little more cynical than the point I was making. I was more one that the transformative aspects of agile as a radical practice will get consumed into commonsense. This will have a dual affect of both shifting practice  making it &#8220;better&#8221; (we see this with <span class="caps">TDD </span>&amp; CI and to a lesser extent Pair Programming) and rounding the edges (which is closer to your video)</p>
<p>&#8211;tb</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Of course agile is a fad by John Quincy</title>
		<link>http://blog.goneopen.com/2008/08/of-course-agile-is-a-fad/comment-page-1/#comment-1913</link>
		<dc:creator>John Quincy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 01:31:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.goneopen.com/2008/08/of-course-agile-is-a-fad/#comment-1913</guid>
		<description>This is why agile is so damned popular:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvks70PD0Rs

It&#039;s hilarious, but unfortunately true.

John</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is why agile is so damned popular:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvks70PD0Rs" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvks70PD0Rs</a></p>
<p>It&#8217;s hilarious, but unfortunately true.</p>
<p>John</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Sharepoint &amp; TDD: Getting started advice by todd</title>
		<link>http://blog.goneopen.com/2011/07/sharepoint-tdd-getting-started/comment-page-1/#comment-1852</link>
		<dc:creator>todd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 21:53:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.goneopen.com/2011/07/sharepoint-tdd-getting-started/#comment-1852</guid>
		<description>My comment is misleading! The main point here is that with WebParts we have to have a lib in the GAC that does not change its version (and is strongly named). Therefore, we had to create a project in the solution that never updated the version. This just adds a little fragmentation and clutter to the solution. In practice, we basically proxied objects through this project.

I hope that makes a little more sense.

p.s. I am in the last throws of putting together a releasable code sample.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My comment is misleading! The main point here is that with WebParts we have to have a lib in the <span class="caps">GAC </span>that does not change its version (and is strongly named). Therefore, we had to create a project in the solution that never updated the version. This just adds a little fragmentation and clutter to the solution. In practice, we basically proxied objects through this project.</p>
<p>I hope that makes a little more sense.</p>
<p>p.s. I am in the last throws of putting together a releasable code sample.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Sharepoint &amp; TDD: Getting started advice by Nick</title>
		<link>http://blog.goneopen.com/2011/07/sharepoint-tdd-getting-started/comment-page-1/#comment-1847</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:21:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.goneopen.com/2011/07/sharepoint-tdd-getting-started/#comment-1847</guid>
		<description>Hi Todd,

Great post. I&#039;m a bit confused by the point &#039;WebParts: canâ€™t be in a strongly typed binary&#039;. Can you clarify that a little?

Thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Todd,</p>
<p>Great post. I&#8217;m a bit confused by the point &#8216;WebParts: can&acirc;€™t be in a strongly typed binary&#8217;. Can you clarify that a little?</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Test Strategy in SharePoint: Part 1 &#8211; testing poor layering is not good TDD by todd</title>
		<link>http://blog.goneopen.com/2010/11/sharepoint-tdd-part-1-poor-layering/comment-page-1/#comment-1806</link>
		<dc:creator>todd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Sep 2011 08:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.goneopen.com/2010/11/sharepoint-tdd-part-1-poor-layering/#comment-1806</guid>
		<description>Cheers. I&#039;ll take a look. Thanks Edwin.

Todd</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cheers. I&#8217;ll take a look. Thanks Edwin.</p>
<p>Todd</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Test Strategy in SharePoint: Part 1 &#8211; testing poor layering is not good TDD by Edwin ANtony</title>
		<link>http://blog.goneopen.com/2010/11/sharepoint-tdd-part-1-poor-layering/comment-page-1/#comment-1800</link>
		<dc:creator>Edwin ANtony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Sep 2011 07:35:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.goneopen.com/2010/11/sharepoint-tdd-part-1-poor-layering/#comment-1800</guid>
		<description>Hi,

Here is the blog contains Reusable sharepoint Test Scenarios

http://sharepointtesting.blogspot.com/

Might be this will be very usefull for those who are very new to sharepoint testing

for any more docs, doubts and for suggestions your mails are welcome to edwinraj.p@gmail.com                            

Regards,

Edwin Antony</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>Here is the blog contains Reusable sharepoint Test Scenarios</p>
<p><a href="http://sharepointtesting.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">http://sharepointtesting.blogspot.com/</a></p>
<p>Might be this will be very usefull for those who are very new to sharepoint testing</p>
<p>for any more docs, doubts and for suggestions your mails are welcome to <a href="mailto:edwinraj.p@gmail.com">edwinraj.p@gmail.com</a>                            </p>
<p>Regards,</p>
<p>Edwin Antony</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Of course agile is a fad by Chas</title>
		<link>http://blog.goneopen.com/2008/08/of-course-agile-is-a-fad/comment-page-1/#comment-1776</link>
		<dc:creator>Chas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 20:21:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.goneopen.com/2008/08/of-course-agile-is-a-fad/#comment-1776</guid>
		<description>If you know how to write good code do not listen to the Agile bullshitters. If you suck at writing code then quit. Agile is something that non-software people bullshit about so they can get into software (without knowing the difference between their arse and their elbow). Oh it is most certainly a fad.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you know how to write good code do not listen to the Agile bullshitters. If you suck at writing code then quit. Agile is something that non-software people bullshit about so they can get into software (without knowing the difference between their arse and their elbow). Oh it is most certainly a fad.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Test Strategy in SharePoint: Part 3 &#8211; Event Receiver as procedural, untestable feature by the tar pit &#187; Sharepoint &#38; TDD: Getting started advice</title>
		<link>http://blog.goneopen.com/2010/12/sharepoint-tdd-part-3-procedural-untestable-code/comment-page-1/#comment-1544</link>
		<dc:creator>the tar pit &#187; Sharepoint &#38; TDD: Getting started advice</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2011 23:20:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.goneopen.com/2010/12/sharepoint-tdd-part-3-procedural-untestable-code/#comment-1544</guid>
		<description>[...] In this case, I wouldn&#8217;t create code with abstractions that allowed you to unit test like this. I found in the end the complexity and testability outweighed the simplicity and [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] In this case, I wouldn&#8217;t create code with abstractions that allowed you to unit test like this. I found in the end the complexity and testability outweighed the simplicity and [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

