Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XP] Asynchronous versus synchronous continuous integration

Expand Messages
  • Ron Jeffries
    ... Be effective. What kind of advice is that? Practice vectors can t point towards effectiveness: there s no measure of that. Practice vectors say test
    Message 1 of 117 , Jan 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      On Sunday, January 2, 2005, at 8:41:11 AM, Robert Watkins wrote:

      > Ron Jeffries wrote:
      >> If more than one pair release has taken place, we really don't know
      >> what caused the problem when the thousand year tests fail. That's
      >> not good. If our thoughts have moved on, that's not good.
      >>
      >> Therefore -- in my opinion -- the vector should point in the
      >> direction of getting all the necessary info instantly, not in the
      >> direction of tolerating and accommodating slow feedback.

      > Shouldn't it point towards effectiveness? Important but non urgent feedback
      > can certainly be delayed. It is this sort of feedback that the asynchronous
      > builds are designed to give (as well as being a safety net for the normal
      > developer builds).

      "Be effective." What kind of advice is that?

      Practice vectors can't point towards effectiveness: there's no
      measure of that. Practice vectors say "test more", or "integrate
      more often", or "sit together".

      The practice vectors are there to remind us that what we're used to
      ... what we "posit" ... isn't necessarily the way things ought to
      be.

      Ron Jeffries
      www.XProgramming.com
      Do I contradict myself? Very well then I contradict myself.
      (I am large, I contain multitudes.) --Walt Whitman
    • Chris Dollin
      ... I have learnt the hard way the following rule: never check significant modifications in (in our case, to SourceForge) ten minutes before going home time on
      Message 117 of 117 , Jan 18, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        On Monday 17 January 2005 17:26, Jeff Grigg wrote:
        > > --- Robert Watkins wrote:
        > >> Personally, I find long builds offensive, _even if they
        > >> aren't causing me any pain_. The "Build Successful"
        > >> message is feedback, and I want to reduce the time that
        > >> feedback takes to arrive.
        >
        > --- Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@X...> wrote:
        > > In what way are they offensive?
        >
        > Let's say it's Friday. At 5:23 P.M. I just checked in my changes
        > and I want to go home. But what if it takes Cruise Control 15
        > minutes to run all the tests? Should I wait until it completes,
        > confirming that my changes were good, before I leave for the
        > weekend? What if it takes half an hour? What if it takes an hour?

        I have learnt the hard way the following rule: never check significant
        modifications in (in our case, to SourceForge) ten minutes before
        going home time on a Friday, or indeed any other day of the week.
        Because, even if all the tests pass, even if you updated just recently,
        *that* will be when you forgot to cvs-add the new tiny class, and when
        the connection to SF is taking place along a stretch of salty string,
        and the fetch-code-into-paranoia-directory step takes forever, and
        *then* you discover there's a problem, and you've come in by train
        not car so an extra ten minutes isn't fatter traffic-jams and twenty
        minutes extra on the commute, it's getting home an *hour* later ...

        --
        Chris "electric hedgehog" Dollin
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.