On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Murali Reddy <murali.re...@citrix.com> wrote: > On 06/03/13 11:52 PM, "Kelven Yang" <kelven.y...@citrix.com> wrote: > >>First +1 on BVT. >> >>Second, should we consider the idea of having a staging area for people to >>check-in? Which is that making master always the stable(reasonable) branch >>for main development, but whenever people make check-ins, it goes into >>staging first, > > +1 for having staging-branch. Unless we are able to run, Bvt's on the > feature branch, there is no confidence that merge of feature branch to > master won't break master. IMO, its not un-common to have a master branch > which is kept stable with regular builds and BVT test passes, then have a > development branch where the features land up first go through the BVT > then pushed to master. On regular basic there can be 'reverse integration' > (dev branch to master) and 'forward integrations' (master to dev) > automated. >
I don't see why we can't run BVT on a feature branch. Should be relatively trivial to setup. Especially for branches expected to live more than a few days, I'd prefer to see testing run on them regularly. --David
