On 11 June 2012 10:54, Alex Rønne Petersen <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi folks, > > http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/pulls.ghtml > > Something like two browser pages of these were 100% green before the > master breakage. It's extremely hard to keep track of what pull > requests are passing whenever master breaks. > > I'm not writing this just because I want to whine about red builds for > the sake of whining. I'm writing this for practical reasons: Whenever > master breaks and all pull requests are reset to a red state, we have > to wait for the *entire* pull auto testing queue to process before we > can start gaining an overview of what's currently mergeable and what's > not. And for the record, this is not a fast process. It takes days, > literally. Our pull request review/merge/reject process is slow enough > as it stands, and this is not helping. It's very frustrating, as a > contributor, to see something this trivial slow down possible merging > of pull requests. I imagine I am not alone in feeling this way. > > All I'm asking is that a look be given to a pull request's state in > the auto tester *before* it's merged, so that we don't slow everything > down for everyone unnecessarily. Brad's GreaseMonkey script[1] makes > this even easier than just opening a separate browser tab. I don't > think it's an exaggeration to say that it takes less than 10 seconds > to check a pull request's state. > > (I think I ought to mention that I have been the cause of master > breakage at least two times, if memory serves me right. I didn't > realize the impact it had until I started reviewing pull requests. Now > that I actually rely heavily on the pull auto tester, I've realized > just how annoying these master breakages can be when reviewing pull > requests (setting aside the issue of master being, well, > broken/unbuildable; this is easily rectifiable, but getting all the > pull requests into a green state again is very much *not*).) > > So, please, let's all use the auto tester infrastructure properly. It > should not be a guideline, but a *requirement* to check the auto > tester before something is merged, IMHO. > > Thanks and regards, > Alex >
Big +1 from here. -- Iain Buclaw *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0'; _______________________________________________ dmd-internals mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
