4 ms·
Wouldn't someone need to fix a broken build? Won't that take time, e.g. five minutes or two hours (or whatever)? And wouldn't it better to break it in a way tha
by aeorgnoieang 8y ago
Wouldn't someone need to fix a broken build? Won't that take time, e.g. five minutes or two hours (or whatever)? And wouldn't it better to break it in a way that it can be fixed quickly?
I guess that it's possible that your code merging workflow allows everyone to work completely independently but some teams don't (and others probably can't). So a broken build is an impediment to other working being done.
- closeparen 8y agoBecause it’s only your PR/diff/changeset that’s broken, and you don’t merge broken code? Are you talking about a scenario where people are just freely pushing to master without a review/CI step? If you recognize the problem with this, why is “deter people from breaking a post-merge CI process” better than “make your CI process pre-merge”?