"Terry Reedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It seems to me that auto testing of the tentatively updated trunk before > final commitment would avoid the 'who checked in test-breaking code' > messages that appear here occasionally.
I don't think there's any fundamental impossibility in setting up such a system for CVS, and am pretty certain there's not for SVN. > But it requires that the update + test-suite time be less than the > average inter-update interval. Indeed. > The current bottleneck in Python development appears to be patch reviews. And acting on those reviews... > So merely making submission and commitment easier will not help much. I'm not sure, I think it could help quite a bit. > An alternative to more reviewers is more automation to make more > effective use of existing reviewers. (And this might also encourage > more reviewers.) The Launchpad group seems to be ahead in this > regard, but I don't know how much this is due to using bazaar. In > any case, ease of improving the review process might be a criterion > for choosing a source code system. But I leave this to ML. > > *Other things being equal*, using a state-of-the-art development system > written in Python to develop Python would be a marketing plus. I think the words "stable" and "reliable" should be in there somewhere :) I don't get the impression bazaar-ng is there yet. Cheers, mwh -- Unfortunately, nigh the whole world is now duped into thinking that silly fill-in forms on web pages is the way to do user interfaces. -- Erik Naggum, comp.lang.lisp _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com