Because not all developers can test all configs, we then have the branch
"bleeding" which is explicitly "works for me, does it break someone else?".
That way, master always works, which is what novice (and I guess most
experienced, too) devs want AND EXPECT, but we have a branch dedicated
to ensuring (as far as possible) that we don't get nasty surprises.
How can master always work, if, as you said yourself, not all developers
can test all configs, what makes you think there WOULD magically exist
tinderbox slaves for all configs then? Or do we plan to have one Linux
TINDERBOX that uses system everything, one that uses system everything
except a bundled boost, one that uses system everything except a bundled
graphite, one that uses system everything except a bundled libjpeg and
libpng, etc? You GET my point? Every configuration option doubles the
number of possible configurations. And I didn't even mention the CHOICE of
Linux distros. But whatever, I just work here.
--tml
Context
Re: Changing mindset of core LO developers to the status of master -- was test infrastructure ideas appreciated ... · Bjoern Michaelsen
Re: Changing mindset of core LO developers to the status of master -- was test infrastructure ideas appreciated ... · Michael Stahl
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.