On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Simon Laws<simonsl...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Alternatively we have to take a manual approach. I see the code > separated into a core and the extensions that the core supports. We > could make some rules/profiles for the types of build you need to do > depending on which files you change. For example, core change = build > all while extension change = build the extension and its tests and > samples. > > Alternatively, rely more heavily on the contract between core and > extensions so that features can be built independently. > Yep, I'm pretty sure we will need to do that to keep 2.x builds relatively concise. As we do that there will be build breaks because the unit tests for the core contracts aren't complete and instead we rely on the various extension tests to verify them, but we can improve them as things get noticed over time. We're unlikely to agree in the near future on a big bang type change to move over to any new build structure like that so IMHO what Giorgio is doing with a profile that suits himself seems like a fine way to make a gradual start on this. ...ant
