[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Groff] [patch] unbreak make install

From: Ingo Schwarze
Subject: Re: [Groff] [patch] unbreak make install
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 16:10:31 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

Hi Ralph,

Ralph Corderoy wrote on Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 12:47:45PM +0100:
> Ingo Schwarze wrote:

>> However, i would consider it common practice for upstream committers
>> to test the build before committing

> I'm surprised groff's autoconf doesn't have a `distcheck'
> target or similar that carries out the actions of automake:
> Even with an empty `check' target, as groff has, it's still useful to
> check the instructure around groff and could be done by developers prior
> to check-in.

>From the description on that page, it appears that infrastructure
was designed to catch issues like the one i originally reported,
among others.

However, my impression is that at least part of the problem we are
facing here, and probably the more important part, is social in
nature rather than technical.

We just witnessed a commit that broke "make dist".  If "make dist"
isn't run before commit (or the result ignored, or run in a way
that is ineffective for finding problems), what makes you think
that "make distcheck" would be used well if it existed?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]