[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: stable vs. experimental archive
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: stable vs. experimental archive |
Date: |
Wed, 22 Apr 2009 12:35:42 -0400 |
On 22-Apr-2009, Robert T. Short wrote:
| One big difference between the stuff I have done and the
| octave model is that I always insist on a lot of regression testing to
| make sure bugs get eliminated and stay eliminated, but that is really a
| matter of discipline on the part of the programmer.
I admit that I tend to be lazy about adding tests when for bug fixes.
We should all probably try to do a better job with that. Likewise
with adding documentation and NEWS entries for new features. Also,
patches to add tests are always welcome...
| I actually have several local repositories that I consider
| experimental. I play around, add debug code, whatever, but don't feel
| at all guilty about trashing the whole thing. I see no reason to even
| make these publicly available at all. However if someone wants to play
| around with something serious lik (e.g. making octave multithreaded or
| some such), then a public repository would be valuable so more people
| can see what is going on, contribute, etc.
Yes. To me, this is the most important thing about distributed
version control systems.
jwe
- Re: stable vs. experimental archive, (continued)
Re: stable vs. experimental archive, Ben Abbott, 2009/04/21