This is only a suggestion so far, don't worry as this stage. But yes we should
provide what is needed if we go this way.
Thanks
Jacques
From: "Pierre Smits" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Before transtioning to Hudson please provide a migration plan, so that
people can plan when and how-to submit contributions.
Regards,
Pierre
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think it is wrong to suggest you will get less contributions. Once a
test framework and structure is in place writing tests as you go takes
no longer than the development and manual test process, and often it can
reduce the time. I think for more people its a mind set adjustment, but
it means you do more structured testing at the point of development
rather than come back days/weeks/months later to find that obscure bug.
There is a transition period that will be a little bumpy as people
adjust but and as you say sensible decisions need to be made about what
contributions require a test module like new features, bug fixes,
enhancements etc.
Ray
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Yes and there one day hopefully we will be able to run some type of
> Continuous Integration. At ASF most projects use Hudson
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_Integration
> http://martinfowler.com/articles/continuousIntegration.html
> http://wiki.apache.org/general/Hudson
>
> Of course before that, as Adam outlined, we would have to have a more
> reliable set of tests.
> Maybe, as David suggested, we could enforce our rules about that (no new
> features without tests).
> I'm afraid this would drastically reduce contributions. Maybe it's
> better to have less but more robust.
>
> I agree that we need marketing, and I think we need as much tests.
>
> Jacques
