Re: [Openh323-devel] pwlib compile error

[GT <gra...@ya...>]

Indeed, it's not feasible for a single developer to regression test every
change across a variety of platforms.
This is why I only suggested to test that the library compiles (and a sample
application works) on one (1) platform.
Obviously, if the CVS commit is for an ODBC driver in Linux, it is reasonable
to expect that the chosen platform to perform the above tests be Linux too.
Granted that compiling PwLib/OpenH323/Opal takes time (less than 10 minutes
anyway) - this may be your chance to grab a cup of coffee or go to lunch!
And testing a sample application should never take more than 2 minutes: if
audio/video gets across, all is fine.
I would go as far as saying this is a matter of good manners opposite our
fellow contributors and users.

--- Josh Mahonin <jma...@cb...> wrote:

> GT wrote:
> > If one CVS committer feels THAT LAZY, I suggest that he/she creates a
> separate
> > branch different from HEAD, and clearly marks it as experimental.
> >   
> I think an experimental branch would be a nice addition to CVS.  I"ve
> been hit by buggy CVS commits a couple times myself - granted they were
> fixed very soon after - it would be convenient to have mostly up-to-date
> versions with a high confidence of compilation.
> 
> Maybe add the experimental tree for new patches, and a 'head' tree
> that's about a week behind to allow bleeding edge changes a chance to be
> tested by the community.  It's not feasible for a single developer to
> regression test every change across a variety of platforms, especially
> with a library as dynamic as Opal.
> 
> I suppose the counter-point would be that you can just check a revision
> a week behind head, but I would suggest that having the week difference
> between the 'experimental' and 'head' tree allows developers the choice
> between checking out a pretty new version with a high chance of working
> for them, as well being able to grab the bleeding edge with the caveat
> that it might not compile on their platform.
> 
> Josh


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com