Home Original page

[Python-Dev] Hg: inter-branch workflow

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Sat Mar 19 23:42:34 CET 2011 
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen at xemacs.org> wrote:
> To the extent the buildbots are not overloaded, this strategy will
> indeed save developer time, as most changes are more or less
> independent of each other (that's why automated merging works at all
> well), and most of the time something that passes in a branch will
> also pass after merging.  So it's probably easier, and certainly less
> wearing on other developers, if you detect breakage in the branch
> rather than waiting for it to happen in the trunk.  However, such
> early detection is not guaranteed because not all semantic conflicts
> are syntactic conflicts.  Ie, the merge may succeed but the code
> break.

Committers would still be obliged to run the tests *locally* before
pushing, so it's only cross-platform issues that would potentially
slip through the cracks. That may still turn the buildbots red, of
course, but the combination should keep them green more reliably.

(e.g. in retrospect, I never would have committed test_crashers in its
original state if I had easily been able to run it across the buildbot
fleet from my sandbox)

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list