On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 01:14:00PM +0000, Graham Percival wrote: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 12:10:20PM +0000, Adam Spiers wrote: > > Sure, understood - but I still don't see why each commit within a > > single issue couldn't be checked accumulatively, rather than just > > applying all three together and only then doing the check.
[snipped] > Bottom line: you're vastly over-estimating our (collective) skill > and comfort level with git. It's safe to assume that we're > similarly in the dark ages about many other aspects of software > development. Hey, give yourselves some credit - at least you're not using CVS; *that's* what I would label as dark ages :-) git is still relatively new for many many people. Also, being short on experience doesn't make it impossible, it just means it will take a bit longer to get there. > Over the past 12 months, almost half of our > development effort has come from windows users who have never > contributed to open source before. They face a pretty steep > learning curve. Sure - I'm finding this a reasonably steep curve, despite the superb documentation etc., and I've been working with F/OSS since 1994. I think that's just the nature of the beast - Lilypond is a large, complex codebase, with many facets to a necessarily complex development process. Sure, it can be improved, but I don't think it's worth beating ourselves up about it either. > > Of course it's more work, but arguably still less work (and less > > noise) than creating an issue per commit. > > True, and Patchy could be doing that for us. The brilliant (if I > may say so myself) of Patchy is that we don't need to teach > everybody how to use moderatly-skilled git commands, we don't need > to fumble around manually clicking on website links, etc etc. We > don't even need a single person who knows all aspects of Patchy -- > as long as people fix little problems with Patchy as we go along, > we can end up with a robust automatic system that does whatever we > want it to. I don't know Patchy, but I agree it certainly sounds like a lot of this work could be automated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_integration _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
