On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 at 06:27:54 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 24/09/14 05:59, Walter Bright wrote:
No, that's not the problem. The problem is what to do when the
"larger
project" fails.
Currently, it is the submitter's job to adjust the test suite,
fix
phobos code, whatever is necessary to get the suite running
again.
Sometimes, in the more convoluted Phobos code, this can be a
real
challenge.
Now replace that with somewhere in a large project, which our
poor
submitter knows absolutely nothing about, it fails. You're
asking him to
go in, understand this large project, determine if it's a
problem with
his submission or a problem with the large project, and fix it.
If it worked before and now it doesn't, then it sounds like a
regression to me.
At some level, then WE become the maintainers of that large
project.
This is completely unworkable.
The author of the library could at least get a notification.
see ore example
mhttp://techgurulab.com/course/java-quiz-online/ore example
