On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 01:31:55PM -0800, Gary Kwong wrote: > On 2/13/14, 12:18 PM, Steve Fink wrote: > >Sounds like the sticking point is finding someone who will agree to > >keep them alive. There's no point in turning them on if they're going > >to be broken for weeks/months at a stretch. > > > > This can be mitigated as per Valgrind by having per-commit builds as > well as the build running on all important branches (fx-team, > inbound, try, etc.) Sheriffs can back out changes which break the > shell build. > > > From skimming the discussion, one thing that's unclear to me is if > >we're talking about Windows shell builds, or Windows shell builds with > >warnings-as-errors. I would guess the latter is what causes most of the > >maintenance overhead? > > > > I at least would like the former.
Likewise. > I suspect some folks would like the latter (warnings-as-errors), but > that's up for discussion because there's also differing viewpoints. > This could be a separate discussion. Also note that in an ideal world, there would also be mac shell builds. Mike _______________________________________________ dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals
