On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 17:53:57 -0500, Ron Jeffries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Friday, December 31, 2004, at 5:38:52 PM, Jason Yip wrote: > > Neither am I... *Everyone* is there to witness the build failure. > > No ... "Everyone" is somewhere else, both physically and mentally, > coding away. A failed build interrupts everyone, or everyone > implicated, at their desk. But the whole theory of your idea is that > they have moved on. No one is ready, no one is engaged in the build > process. It's a fire alarm.
Are we talking about the "pre-checkin-automated test" or the post check-in automated test after everyone runs tests in their workspaces? Jason and I are talking about the later. Or are we talking about having integration tokens where one person checks in code, runs tests, etc? Which could work, but may lead to very slow rates of change... ???(I'm confused). -Steve -- Steve Berczuk | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.berczuk.com SCM Patterns: Effective Teamwork, Practical Integration www.scmpatterns.com To Post a message, send it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/extremeprogramming/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
