*cough* *cough* jhbuild! *cough* ;-)
On 4 January 2013 09:05, Didier Roche <[email protected]> wrote: > Le 03/01/2013 04:38, Stephen M. Webb a écrit : > > On 01/02/2013 09:43 PM, Daniel van Vugt wrote: > > Did the compiler really give a warning? As far as I can tell, Nux, Unity and > Compiz already use "-Wall -Werror". > > If mistakes still slip past gcc (and they do) then I recommend making your > code compatible with clang because it gives > more and better warnings/errors. We've done this for lp:compiz but I'm not > sure if Nux and Unity are clang-friendly yet. > > The compiler is unlikely to have given a warning in production builds since > Unity, at least, does not compile with > -Wextra (or -Wunused). My guess is this level of warning was not enabled > because of the sheer amount of noise it > generates (which is itself a signal that should not be ignored). We have it > on our list as a low-priority item to be > able to build with -Wextra enabled but it's hard to justify thousands of > lines of code churn when expanding and > improving overall unit test coverage will give us a better return on > investment of our limited resources. > > I believe that a proper test harness and test coverage would have caught the > regression. Almost all of the test cases I > have seen going in to Unity in the last few months have been to verify new > functionality or regression tests for bug > fixes, and that's an improvement over past practices, but without a > validation test suite we're still using the Edit and > Pray methodology. The start of a new calendar year seems like a good time to > start a renewed push for Quality in Unity. > I am going to make expanded test coverage a priority part of the desktop > Unity polish for 13.04 and I think the > investment will pay off going forward with other form factors. > > > Hey guys, > > Yeah, we need to push back quality at the heart of our process. > > Just back from vacations, I have the unpleasant surprise to notice that > unity fails to build in the staging ppa since 2012-12-19 and that more than > 7 merges were done in between without fixing it first (or reverting the > faulty merge): > https://launchpad.net/~unity-team/+archive/staging/+packages?field.name_filter=unity&field.status_filter=superseded&field.series_filter=raring<https://launchpad.net/%7Eunity-team/+archive/staging/+packages?field.name_filter=unity&field.status_filter=superseded&field.series_filter=raring> > I guess it's failing due to the precompiled header: > http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~unity-team/unity/trunk/revision/3002. Unity > is built in parallel in the ppa, that's maybe why it passed the merger step. > > Mirv is now looking and is taking action to get that under control again, > but please please, when you do merge something, track the builds and > install your branch locally to check for side-effects. For this one, if we > couldn't get that fixed easily, the quickest path at the time would have > been to revert ASAP the branch until we find a good fix and not having an > unreleasable unity state as we have right now. > > Cheers, > Didier > > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~unity-dev > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~unity-dev > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~unity-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~unity-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
