Andy Jones wrote:
It seems to me that it's all about what the repository actually +is+.
Jacob would like the repository to contain only tested code, ready for
release - if I understand correctly.
No, you misunderstand. This has not to do with unstable vs. stable
or development vs. production code.
I am simply asking for an (optional) review step to prevent the
repository being poluted with crap code. What this review will
contain (nothing, manual review, style check, unit testing,
function test, ...) must be decided by the organization. Typical
it will vary based on the current phase of the project;
For a system already in beta test I'd be very strict on what to
let in. For a prototype mock-up just started I'd be more lenient.
You may claim none of this belong in a VCS and I agree in principle.
Problem is that the system that should take care of this *outside*
the VCS must be so tightly integrated with the VCS that it would be
simpler just to define it as part of it.
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
