This is why you need automated builds. These at least let the developers
know when something isn't building (without them having to actively "do"
anything). If you want to be a bit more brutal (at the risk of annoying
people) you can arrange for the nightly build system to send email to all
the committers when something isn't building. This is a strong incentive to
break the practice of checking broken code in.
It's a bit controversial sometimes, and it can be annoying - e.g. if one of
the things you depend upon breaks your code when you haven't changed
anything. But at least you know that there's something wrong, and at least
a new developer can look at a web page (assuming the build results are on
the web) and make a decision about whether to try building their own
version.
Tom
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Schottstaedt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 20 July 2001 12:33
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] packaging
>
>
> A problem with depending on CVS is that, in my experience,
> CVS seems to encourage very sloppy attitudes -- I think
> I have better luck with tarballs. Apparently many developers
> don't think it's a bug if the CVS version won't build, since
> it's just there for developers or something -- when I complain,
> the response can be loosely translated as "go to hell".
>
--
NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is
intended by Convergys Corporation for the use of the named individual or
entity to which it is directed and may contain information that is
privileged or otherwise confidential. If you have received this electronic
mail transmission in error, please delete it from your system without
copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender of the error by reply email
or by telephone (collect), so that the sender's address records can be
corrected.
