New build system problems

Martin Buchholz martinrb at
Tue Mar 5 23:44:33 UTC 2013

On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:30 PM, David Holmes <david.holmes at>wrote:

> On 6/03/2013 9:17 AM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>>  IMO the right approach is to improve processes so that bad commits don't
>> cause other developers to lose time.  Once upon a time, I was actually
>> the tl gatekeeper and I implemented such a system.  Today, I see there's
>> a tl-gate, but there's close to zero testing between submission to
>> tl-gate and "promotion" to tl-proper.  In the system I implemented,
>> there was a full build/test cycle in between.
> The processes should be there to catch mistakes, not to encourage lack of
> upfront testing.
I disagree.  The submitter should be responsible for the "right" amount of
upfront testing.

> If the "gate" provided such functionality it would be like submitting each
> change via JPRT. While a nice idea it is completely impractical given the
> resources it would require.

But ... I actually implemented such a system for tl, back in 2005!

The current state is a regression.


More information about the build-dev mailing list