3 ms·

I'm all for cool new projects, but when the first thing I see in a project's readme is "build: failing", I'm really discouraged from looking into it further.

• wyqydsyq 8y ago
  https://travis-ci.org/lucee/Lucee/branches https://travis-ci.org/lucee/Lucee/branches master branch being broken for 3 months doesn't exactly instil a lot of confidence in something that seems to be intended to run critical legacy software
  • dominicr 8y ago
    Other people's branching strategies are often a mystery to me. If master has 20 builds and the latest stable release branch has 1071 builds and there are 25 stable versions currently available for download but those only go back to version 4.5; then I think they're not using master as the stable release branch.
  • zspitzer 8y ago
    5.2 is the stable branch https://github.com/lucee/Lucee/tree/5.2 https://github.com/lucee/Lucee/tree/5.2 5.3 is the active development branch https://github.com/lucee/Lucee/tree/5.3 https://github.com/lucee/Lucee/tree/5.3
• bdcravens 8y ago
  You mean having a failing build like this new project? https://travis-ci.org/rails/rails https://travis-ci.org/rails/rails FWIW, Lucee has been around for several years. (prior to Rails) It originated as Railo; some issues with the company that owned Railo the company led to the same development team forking to Lucee. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railo#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railo#History