Re: [O] [Bug] commit 39070b7fc7 breaks babel test

[Skip Collins]

On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Eric Schulte <address@hidden> wrote:
> Skip Collins <address@hidden> writes:
>> Would it make sense to automatically enforce passing all tests before
>> git accepts a change?
>
> I for one would strongly oppose this change.  This would only make it
> take longer and thus make it less likely that new code is committed.
> This is the master branch where development should be fast and
> experimentation should take place, not the maintenance branch.

Designating something as an expected failure seems to be a good way to
track minor issues that need eventually to be resolved. As a user, I
frequently update with make up2 just to avoid getting bitten by stupid
errors that might sneak into master. Is it really that much extra work
for a developer to run the same command before committing and either
fix the error or mark it as a known failure?