On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Lee Braiden <leebr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> b) No, it really wouldn't be ridiculous, if you've checked it properly at > a QA stage. By definition, it's ridiculous to KEEP checking it, once it's > already been checked thoroughly, as a proper QA process would do. I'm not sure what your QA process normally entails, but can it guarantee a build that is free of errors with *zero margin for failure*? Anything less is a step back from what Rust currently provides, IMO. -- Tony Arcieri
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
