Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Arjan Bouter <a_bouter AT ezrs.com>]

On Mon,  8 Nov 2004 08:39:02 -0800
Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us> wrote:

> Quoting Bas van Gils <Bas.vanGils AT cs.ru.nl>:
> <snip>
> > I agree that spells should be *tested* and/or *checked*. From the top of 
> > my
> > head, I thought that the procedure was:
> > - playground => devel grimoire, may contain spells that don't build / 
> > break
> >   stuff
> > - if it builds => move into test
> > - if it runs stable for a (long) while => move to stable
> >
> > Right?
> 
> Correct. The package did build, but it wasn't tested with all combinations 
> of
> its options (it was only tested without the patch, not with it) that caused
> the problem.

I'd like to add that if you can't test an option yourself, ask someone who 
can.
For example, I'd gladly test new spells with selinux support before they hit 
the
test grimoire.

Arjan

> 
> -sandalle
> 
> --
> Eric Sandall                     |  Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
> eric AT sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61  |  http://www.sourcemage.org/
> http://eric.sandall.us/          |  SysAdmin @ Inst. Shock Physics @ WSU
> http://counter.li.org/  #196285  |  http://www.shock.wsu.edu/
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
> 
>

Attachment: pgpeck5VWtCrn.pgp
Description: PGP signature