On 2009-12-29, at 2:15 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> >> Good point. When I have a fix for OB under pharo. What is the preferred >> ?process. So far I posted them on the bug tracker, is that okay? > > OB has its bug tracker at <http://code.google.com/p/omnibrowser/>. > > In the past people have been committing fixes to > http://source.wiresong.ca/ob. The problem with this approach was that > there is no control over what got integrated. People submitted changes > to wrong packages, untested changes, changes that broke the tests, > changes that broke the meta-model, or changes that simply broke some > browsers. Then people merged random branches and it was not clear what > to load, what worked and what didn't. I don't know what the take on > this is from Colin? Yes, we definitely need a little more process around this. I'm thinking of having a separate inbox repository where contributions can be made. Once a contribution had been tested, it would be promoted to the main repository. Ultimately, I'd like to have a robot do at least part of that - run the tests and either report test failures or promote the changes - but for now we can do it manually. Thoughts? Colin _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
