State of Play

[Denis Koroskin]

On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 23:33:43 +0300, Tomas Lindquist Olsen <tomas.l.olsen at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Walter Bright
> <newshound1 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>>
>>> So what about the following counterargument: "even if nightly builds
>>> were made available, how can we be sure that enough people are using
>>> them to sufficiently test them?"  OK, sure, if not many people are
>>> using the nightly builds, then there wouldn't be much benefit.  But it
>>> does seem to work out fine for a lot of projects.  And with a proper
>>> SCM set up which you commit to daily, there's virtually no work on
>>> your part.  You just commit, and everyone else can download and
>>> compile.
>>
>> I believe that people downloading half-baked works in progress and then
>> finding problems I already know about and am fixing is probably not more
>> productive.
>>
>
> Some of us might actually look at your changes.
>
> 1) We get a forewarning for changes that might affect LDC/GDC/D.NET etc.
>
> 2) We can comment on changes. Ideally there would be a mailing list
> with each commit. This makes discussion of specific changes much
> easier.
>
> 3) You get feedback on the code.
>
> I'm not sure how many people have access to your code, or if you even
> use a SCM repository locally.
>
> As an extra bonus you could release your internal test suite as well.
> This would be useful for projects like LDC, as a compliment to
> DStress. Do you use Dstress?
>
> The testing process of DMD could be much less opaque in general.
>
> -Tomas
> 

*Highly* agree!