On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> Matthew Knepley <[email protected]> writes: > >> Obviously everyone wants (1) and (3) to be automated - but we > >> currently don't have that.. > > > > > > I, of course, disagree. (1) is now automated in that you get a warning > > if you try to merge next. That will help me. Please avert your eyes. > > We have way bigger problems if people are skipping (1). Branches need > to be reviewed before merging. Always. Why is this even being > discussed? > It seems that I am talking to myself, but I will say it again. People miss things, especially in routine setting where it gets repetitive. Having automated checks and warnings is very helpful: http://www.amazon.com/The-Logic-Failure-Recognizing-Situations/dp/0201479486 Matt > Having a warning to remind contributors sounds useful to me, but > integrators should never be merging without reviewing. > -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener
