From: "David Lichteblau" <dave@lichteblau.com>
To: Thomas Zander <zander@javalobby.org>, mauve-discuss@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: Mauve patches.
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2004 18:57:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040411185745.GD21097@lichteblau.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200404111919.24816.zander@javalobby.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1545 bytes --]
Hi Thomas,
Quoting Thomas Zander (zander@javalobby.org):
> On Sunday 11 April 2004 14:22, David Lichteblau wrote:
> > Quoting Thomas Zander (zander@javalobby.org):
> > > I hope you'll agree that its more important to have people creating
> > > patches and moving the project forward then to always have a 100%
> > > correct CVS. (problems can be fixed post-commit)
> > No!
> David; I have not seen you before; an introduction might be in place.
> After we found out what your part in Mauve is;
I'm just yet another Mauve user.
> would you care to elaborate on your position?
Sure: "Problems should be fixed pre-commit."
BTW, to ask a technical question, is the "tagging" of Mauve testcases
used in practice? Much of the complexity of the existing build systems
stems from the fact that tests are selected by a non-trivial script. If
not for the tags, something like "find . -name \*.java" would be enough
to select all files.
Mark Wielaard sent an analysis of test suite failures for current
Classpath, which I found very helpful (thanks!). When I am interested
to see whether the current Classpath version "works", which tags should
be used? All of them, right?
Unless I misunderstood Thomas' question, he could not compile all of
Mauve because his script tried to compile _everything_, as opposed to
those files usually chosen by the standard build system. I would find
it a little confusing if Mauve provided two build systems, one which
uses tags and one which does not.
Thanks,
David
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-11 18:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-06 7:55 Thomas
2004-04-06 8:47 ` Michael Koch
2004-04-08 19:34 ` Thomas Zander
2004-04-08 19:50 ` Michael Koch
2004-04-08 19:58 ` Andrew Haley
2004-04-11 6:48 ` Thomas Zander
2004-04-11 12:22 ` David Lichteblau
2004-04-11 17:20 ` Thomas Zander
2004-04-11 18:57 ` David Lichteblau [this message]
2004-04-11 19:37 ` Thomas Zander
2004-04-12 4:12 ` C. Brian Jones
2004-04-16 20:23 ` Anthony Green
2004-04-16 22:57 ` C. Brian Jones
2004-04-13 13:22 ` Andrew Haley
2004-04-13 13:55 ` Thomas
2004-04-13 14:30 ` Andrew Haley
2004-04-13 17:14 ` Thomas Zander
2004-04-13 17:45 ` Andrew Haley
2004-04-13 18:59 ` Thomas Zander
2004-04-14 9:56 ` Andrew Haley
2004-04-14 0:09 ` Bill McFadden
2004-04-15 22:56 ` Mark Wielaard
2004-04-17 14:45 ` Thomas Zander
2004-04-11 15:56 ` Archie Cobbs
2004-04-15 21:10 ` Mark Wielaard
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040411185745.GD21097@lichteblau.com \
--to=dave@lichteblau.com \
--cc=mauve-discuss@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=zander@javalobby.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).