Re: Preventing "Dirty" Checkins

[Paul Sander]

>--- Forwarded mail from address@hidden

>Ones Self <address@hidden> wrote:

>> I'm running a CVS server which compiles and tests the current
>> files in CVS every hour.  I would like to make new checkins
>> available _only_ if they compile and pass the tests.

>> So, if a user checks in something which does not compile, for
>> example, other users who check out at that time will not get
>> the new version until the problem is fixed.  Everytime you
>> do an update, you know you're getting a clean version of the
>> source; one that compiles, and in which the tests pass.

>I don't think you can do that.  Well, you could trigger a full
>recompile from commitinfo and allow the commit only if the build
>succeeds, but your commits would be a bit sluggish that way.

>What you *could* do is trigger the build from loginfo (post-commit)
>and update a moving tag if the build is successful.  That way
>your trunk can contain garbage, but the last successfully built
>commit will have an unambiguous marker on it.  Your users can
>choose the unstable tip,
>    cvs checkout foo

>or the last known good version,
>    cvs checkout -rLAST_GOOD foo

>but in the latter case they won't be able to commit changes.
>(Well, they could start a branch, but that's taking us off-topic.)

>The loginfo trigger would be asynchronous, as in
>https://www.cvshome.org/docs/manual/cvs-1.11.17/cvs_18.html#SEC175
>and there would be negligible delay to a commit.

>Simple question:  why can't the developers do a top-level "make test"
>before committing, and sidestep the question ?  Or do the unit tests
>take that long to run ?  If the latter, you'll have to guard your
>build-test-retag script against multiple instances of itself.

Seems like the triggers and build procedures could conspire to enforce
a policy that developers complete successful builds, too.  The build
procedure could have a target that lists its products, one of which
be a summary report.  The trigger could audit the summary and make sure
that the targets are all newer than the sources and fail if anything was
done out of order.

>--- End of forwarded message from address@hidden