| 1 |
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 9:20 AM, Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 01:34 Sun 16 Nov , Alec Warner wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Change the workflow[1]. |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> Right now you pay the cost of running tree-wide tests every time you |
| 6 |
>> commit. This incentivizes developers to commit less often (to avoid |
| 7 |
>> paying the tax of tree-wide tests). |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> In CVS commiting less is a problem: |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> 1. Make Changes to a number of files. |
| 12 |
>> 2. Script your commits. |
| 13 |
>> 3. Run Script |
| 14 |
>> 4....N: Script commits one file at a time. |
| 15 |
>> 4.5: A race condition between changes you have commited to CVS versus |
| 16 |
>> uncommited changes occurs when CVS is synced to Osprey. This race |
| 17 |
>> condition can often cause tree oddness. |
| 18 |
>> 5. All Changes commited. |
| 19 |
>> 5.5: All changes synced to Osprey. |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>> I am unsure if repoman category and repoman tree-wide commits avoid |
| 22 |
>> this race condition. |
| 23 |
>> |
| 24 |
>> A new scheme would be: |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
>> 1. Make Changes to a number of files. |
| 27 |
>> 2. Category or Treewide Repoman commit. |
| 28 |
>> 3. Run taxing tree-wide tests. |
| 29 |
>> 4. git commit -a (?) |
| 30 |
>> 5. Done! |
| 31 |
>> |
| 32 |
>> Tell me if I'm horribly wrong or missing something, it is late here. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> Are you saying we could use the index here? Another option (that you may |
| 35 |
> or may not be suggesting) could be to make a new 'repoman push' |
| 36 |
> operation that actually does the hard checks, and make 'repoman commit' |
| 37 |
> just do a local commit and only very quick checks. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
That was what I was thinking. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> -- |
| 43 |
> Thanks, |
| 44 |
> Donnie |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
> Donnie Berkholz |
| 47 |
> Developer, Gentoo Linux |
| 48 |
> Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com |
| 49 |
> |
Archives