Hello.
On 07/27/2017 12:44 AM, Andrew Williams wrote:
Hi,
An interesting point. I guess I figure there is something between massive
merges and the alternative of breaking master. Isn't it fair to say that we
shouldn't ever be breaking master even if we're doing cool new stuff? (yes,
I know I have done it too, it's the way things are just now).
And I do not see how a changed workflow would change this behavior. I
have been asking people for ages to run make check before they push. No
happening as I can clearly see when running it myself. You think this
will now longer be the case for the develop branch? I would think it
will be. Which means that someone has to test things and poke people to
have it fixed up before develop gets merged into master.
Who will handle that part? The developer who already did not run make
check or did disable some configure options which did hide some problems
from him (disabled cxx bindings on developers side is a big source of
frustration for me when simply trying to have our normal all, check and
examples targets build)
I simply fail to see how the new develop buffer branch would fix all
these problems. It would hide them in through one more level of
abstraction, is my feeling.
regards
Stefan Schmidt
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
