Martin v. Löwis <mar...@v.loewis.de> added the comment: > Bit of a chicken/egg issue here. Since we haven't had OS X buildbots > for very long, and the ones we do have represent odd configurations, > I think it's premature to say that "the port *doesn't* pass the test > suite on a regular manner".
And I didn't mean that literally. Rather, I meant "the build slave that you are proposing to add to the stable list don't pass the test suite on a regular manner" - it's ultimately the individual slave (OS, compiler installation, buildbot version, network connectivity) that can be questioned for stability. So that's not really a chicken-and-egg problem. If people keep working on the OSX port, they might ultimately arrive in a state where even the odd configurations become stable. > I think it's just as reasonable to say > that the developers making changes just aren't aware of bad > side-effects on OS X. A good way to remedy that would be to make > those bad side-effects more apparent, for example by adding an OS X > buildbot into the "stable" set. I am not convinced that this is a good way. First, they are all volunteers, so they chose to do whatever they like to do. Then, even if they *are* willing to fix OSX problems, they might never look at the buildbot results. So any estimation of the effect that the proposed change might have is pure guessing. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue9048> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
