On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Mike Barcroft wrote:
> Doug Barton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
> > > I *DID* test it with a full `make world'. By chance is this your second
> > > `make world' after the change? It seems we are using the host awk
> > > instead of the one we built. Requiring someone to do two back-to-back
> > > `make world's before a commit has never been a requirement. Some things
> > > we just find out after a commit.
> >
> > "Required" isn't really the question. It seems like common sense
> > to me when discussing such a frequently used build tool.
>
> I'm sure there's better things you could be doing besides lecturing
> David about testing his changes before committing. Not every bug can
> be found before committing, which is why we have a little thing called
> -CURRENT.
A) Two sentences isn't a lecture. B) We have "a little thing
called -current" to shake out the non-obvious bugs that still exist after
all reasonable testing has already occurred. If you're not familiar with
the arguments about how much valuable developer time is wasted due to
insufficiently tested changes, check the archives.
My only purpose in replying was to state my objection to the
sufficency of David's argument. There are a lot of things that aren't
"required," but are a good idea none the less.
--
"We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail."
- George W. Bush, President of the United States
September 20, 2001
Do YOU Yahoo!?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
