Hi!
I noticed some new code breaking some other code in current master. to
prevent this, it would be nice to use regression tests. i'll fix the
current problem, and also add a regression test to prevent this
happening again. but that's where i need the help of other people:
we should all run the
> Is there a process for this? Who's in charge of this? Frank? Please
> let me know how to proceed.
Yes, would be cool if we could get a small guide online so no one has an excuse
:)
I am not sure of the actual process of running the tests so can Robin or Frank
enlighten us then I can see about
Hi,
from my point of view best would be a continuous integration process.
Just a quick overview:
- on each commit/push the continuous integration server (e.g. Hudson/Jenkins)
will get the current version from gitorious
- the test suite will be executed
- additional tools can be executed as well
On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Thomas Müller wrote:
> - on each commit/push
i think the important part is to do it /before/ each commit to master.
i.e. if you commit stuff to a branch, you're allowed to break tests,
but you just configure git to only accept merges whose tests pass.
that way it
Am 06.04.2012 13:08 schrieb "Michiel de Jong" :
> but you just configure git to only accept merges whose tests pass.
> that way it's the responsibility of the person committing new code to
> not create any regressions on existing functionality. in case of
> conflict, the already existing master sho
I think it a great idea to do continuos integration. It´s a good thing to
ensure quality.
I just wouldn´t introduce too much processes and bureaucracy so that´s still
easy and fun to contribute for new people.
And we need an volunteer to set everything up of course :-)
Frank
On 06.04.2012, at
Am Samstag, dem 07.04.2012 um 21:13 schrieb Frank Karlitschek:
> I think it a great idea to do continuos integration. It´s a good thing to
> ensure quality.
> I just wouldn´t introduce too much processes and bureaucracy so that´s still
> easy and fun to contribute for new people.
>
> And we nee
