Hi Isma, > -the incentive for developers to make it right is write access to pi: RM > will remove write access privileges in pi repository for two weeks to a > developer who: > -commits a change that breaks nightly build and does not fix it within the > next 48 hours > -commits two changes that break nightly build within two consecutive > weeks, no matter how fast it is fixed later I agree with the 48h limit to fix the situation. But instead I would reduce it to 24h. If you push a commit that breaks something, you can always backout the commit, study it with calm, fix it and push it again.
However I'm not convinced with the other measure of counting 2 build fails to penalize someone. I mean, do we consider *any* failed build? Example: * I commit something that passes all the possible tests in my computer. * I push it and it fails on a build machine because it's 64bit, and my machine was 32bit. Counting which failure are "punishable" and which is counter-productive and too time consuming. What do you think? Juan Pablo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf _______________________________________________ Openbravo-development mailing list Openbravo-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openbravo-development
