2013/7/22 Tyler Romeo <tylerro...@gmail.com> > Architectural integrity of code is a design-level issue. Continuous > integration is a programming and quality assurance-level issue. They have > nothing to do with each other, and you can maintain architectural integrity > just fine without having to split your singular product into multiple > products. >
I would disagree with you regarding your statement that architectural integrity and quality assurance have nothing to do with each other. I hope I do not have to explain - but if I do, feel free to ask. I agree with you regarding your statement that you can maintain architectural integrity without checking it automatically. You can also make sure that code style is not violated manually. Or that code works without unit tests and by testing manually. But considering that reviewing resources are scarce, I prefer to test as much automatically as possibly by CI and relieve the reviewer from considering e.g. the dependency architecture of your classes during a review. I do not see the advantage of doing that manually. I think that also core would benefit if architectural constraints could be enforced by CI. > If that were true, than the MW core would be split across fifty > different repositories. (If Makefiles can compile different parts of a > product independently, then so can we.) I fail to understand what you mean here, sorry. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
