From owner-cvs-all Thu Mar 28 8:39:31 2002 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from rover.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD8D737B416; Thu, 28 Mar 2002 08:39:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from harmony.village.org (harmony.village.org [10.0.0.6]) by rover.village.org (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g2SGdLi27720; Thu, 28 Mar 2002 09:39:21 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@village.org) Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2SGdIf28504; Thu, 28 Mar 2002 09:39:18 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@village.org) Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 09:38:57 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <20020328.093857.81408996.imp@village.org> To: mi@aldan.algebra.com Cc: sobomax@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/Mk bsd.port.mk From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <200203281628.g2SGSFp0016178@aldan.algebra.com> References: <1017310574.580.20.camel@notebook> <200203281628.g2SGSFp0016178@aldan.algebra.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message: <200203281628.g2SGSFp0016178@aldan.algebra.com> Mikhail Teterin writes: : On 28 Mar, Maxim Sobolev wrote: : : > The whole affair (the problem spotted by knu and this one) showed that : > bento testing, is important, but should not be used as a substitute : > for ordinary peer review and testing, because bento's bsd.port.mk : > usage pattern is quite poor. Unfortunately, I suspect that even : > though my patch was available for more that two weeks but only few : > individuals actually gave it a try. That's the real problem, which : > needs to be addressed somehow. : : That's fine, actually. Only what you commit gets tested -- and fixed. : Seems like a normal worflow to me -- as long as the fixing part comes : promptly. I have found that there's an increasisng group of people that test things. When I put patches up, I'll get 2 or 3 people telling me "looks good" or "tested it and XXXX is right or wrong." If I have a series of patches, I'll put out maybe 10 or 12 versions of the patches and get maybe 8 people to test it. Then when I commit it to -current, I get about 500 people testing it within a week (at least for pccard stuff). I find out within a week if I've broken something on somebody's machine. So when I commit more than once a week, it can be a little hard to sort out which thing broke stuff, but with small commits it is easy for the complainer to do the binary search for me. When I commit to -stable, I get about 100000 people testing things right away. I find out that things break within a few days, even after letting things mellow in -current for a while. They have more whacked out hardware than the folks that run -current, generally speaking. However, since I batch things into -stable, it can be a whole lot harder to find out what, exactly, I did to break things, which has left a few laptops non-functional to this day.... Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message