I never said the development teams should use it. I realized technical
decisions can't be made by community voting. But -
1. Sometimes a team is interested in seeing what the community/other
teams think
2. Some decisions are not technical, like you said the marketing team
can find loomio useful
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Colin Walters walt...@verbum.org wrote:
Do we have (makefile) infrastructure to allow GTests to run both
uninstalled (during make *check) and installed?
Not at this time; that'd be nice, but I think the jhbuild model
mostly obviates the need for uninstalled
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Matthias Clasen
matthias.cla...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Colin Walters walt...@verbum.org
wrote:
Do we have (makefile) infrastructure to allow GTests to run both
uninstalled (during make *check) and installed?
Not at this
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:21:47AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
https://live.gnome.org/GnomeGoals/InstalledTests
I'm not entirely sure what sort of tests your framework is designed
to contain...
Have you seen Brian Nitz's work on GNOME accessibility tests that
can be automatically run from a
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 08:46 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
You are not going to get me to buy eagerly into a new installed tests
scheme for glib if it means that I have to give up make check.
Well, would you be OK with:
$ jhbuild make
$ gnome-desktop-testing-runner glib
?
Note though that
On 04/26/2013 10:12 AM, Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 08:46 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
You are not going to get me to buy eagerly into a new installed tests
scheme for glib if it means that I have to give up make check.
Well, would you be OK with:
$ jhbuild make
$
On 26/04/13 15:12, Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 08:46 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
You are not going to get me to buy eagerly into a new installed tests
scheme for glib if it means that I have to give up make check.
I think it's worth having both, with the majority of tests
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 15:47 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
I don't see any reason why this couldn't be equally true for make
check:
Because make check requires rebuilding the module just to run the tests.
I'm running the gjs test suite at the moment on the complete resulting
installed tree
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 10:32 -0400, Dan Winship wrote:
On 04/26/2013 10:12 AM, Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 08:46 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
You are not going to get me to buy eagerly into a new installed tests
scheme for glib if it means that I have to give up make
This is awesome! Worth having!
Sri
On Apr 26, 2013 3:01 AM, Andrea Veri a...@gnome.org wrote:
Hello guys,
from today the Services bot will be able to manage / log meetings by using
the MeetBot plugin. The logs will be publicly available at [1]. For more
information about the plugin itself
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 14:44 +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 10:21:47AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
https://live.gnome.org/GnomeGoals/InstalledTests
I'm not entirely sure what sort of tests your framework is designed
to contain...
Most of what currently lives as make
Hi,
On 04/26/2013 05:01 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 10:32 -0400, Dan Winship wrote:
I want make distcheck to still run all of my tests, to guarantee that
everything works correctly when built from a tarball, not just when
built from git.
That's going to be a high bar to
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 18:49 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
Hi,
On 04/26/2013 05:01 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 10:32 -0400, Dan Winship wrote:
I want make distcheck to still run all of my tests, to guarantee that
everything works correctly when built from a
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:56 AM, Colin Walters walt...@verbum.org wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 18:49 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
Hi,
On 04/26/2013 05:01 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 10:32 -0400, Dan Winship wrote:
I want make distcheck to still run all of
On 26/04/13 18:26, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
Not to mention, build mechanisms generally use tarballs and prefer
them
If the tarballs produced by cgit become the recommended thing for
tarball-based build systems to consume - perhaps by having a branch off
to one side that does contain the
2013/4/26 Tristan Van Berkom t...@gnome.org
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:56 AM, Colin Walters walt...@verbum.org wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 18:49 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
Hi,
On 04/26/2013 05:01 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 10:32 -0400, Dan Winship wrote:
On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 17:21 +0800, jiangpengfei wrote:
I have a doubt about the use of gvariant.
In the source file:
glib-2.34.3/gio/tests/gdbus-test-codegen.c:860,
foo_igen_bar_call_test_primitive_types_sync uses a address of
ret_val_bytestring, which is a local variable
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 12:56 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 18:49 +0200, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
Hi,
On 04/26/2013 05:01 PM, Colin Walters wrote:
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 10:32 -0400, Dan Winship wrote:
I want make distcheck to still run all of my tests, to
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Colin Walters walt...@verbum.org wrote:
Anyways...dropping tarballs is not going to happen soon, but I'm happy
to consider what we need to do to lay the foundations now.
More short-term, would it make sense to leverage the build servers to
run make distcheck
On Fri, 2013-04-26 at 22:56 +0200, Florian Müllner wrote:
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Colin Walters walt...@verbum.org wrote:
Anyways...dropping tarballs is not going to happen soon, but I'm happy
to consider what we need to do to lay the foundations now.
More short-term, would it
20 matches
Mail list logo
