Approved, thanks!

Approved, thanks!

Result can't be [[2,2,1,3]]. In that case, 3 comes after 2 (it doesn't matter if they are adjacent or not), and so it doesn't break the second rule of [2,3].

Changed sum in description and initial code to total

Ok, thanks! I changed the description, and I hope it's alright now.

I'm sorry, but I can't quite understand the point, and I can't just "completly" reword the description. Other seem to have no problem with it, and there is even the image that shows the pattern for different sizes. Can you please explain what exactly you want me to change? That would be also helpful if you explained how you resorted the pattern, so I can understand the problematic points that the description has.

P.S. I can also you this image, if it would be better:

Ok.

Please, respond to the message above. I really don't want to close this issue, but that is the only thing that I can do, because there is no way of implementing distribution tests into example test cases without putting testing code right there or in preloaded code. As I already said, it will be very hard and unnecesary to list all the possible solutions.

Thanks! I tried to do this, but encountered some problems with it... How can I put this tests in the preloaded code? And if it's not the best solution, than would it be ok to just put the tests on distribution in the example test cases themselves?

Fixed it, update will be published soon ( problems 1, 2 and 3 ).
Problem №5 has it's own "thread", and I will mark that issue as resolved instead.

Fixed it, update will be published soon.

1. Returning the package number can be harder than just the weight of the package, and it really changes the solution; not just that, it makes testing much harder, because I can't just check, if all values are unique ( some weights might repeat ). It seems like it will add more problems to the testing, which is already really complex.
2. As you probably saw from a kata itself, all of the outputs are really human-readable. I guess I can remake it for indexing to start with 0, but for me it seems kind-of wrong or somehing. I would like to hear other's opinions on that one.

Description says

... beetwen both of them, return 3 strings ( you can use \n, like this String1\nString2 ). First string is always ...

And by that I meant that you MUST use \n. Maybe that wasn't so clear, so I will change this up a little bit, and probably change the tests so there is no exception.

EDIT: I changed it ;)