3 ms·
You can still have them in 2 commits, and configure your CI to build both of them, and the first 1 should fail. We actually have a rule that there must be 1 co
by dtech 4y ago
You can still have them in 2 commits, and configure your CI to build both of them, and the first 1 should fail.
We actually have a rule that there must be 1 commit just introducing a test that fails on CI for bugfix PRs.
- chrisweekly 4y agoThat's interesting, explicitly to require that bugs be reproduced in CI. It makes sense in theory, but in praxis (IME) CI systems tend to be overtaxed / underprovisioned - meaning this extra burden might be questionable. /$.02
- nemetroid 4y agoThe same burden is present when splitting the two commits into two PRs.
- chrisweekly 4y agoActually no, the burden I referred to was -- unrelated to stacked vs serial PRs -- specifically the GP's practice of requiring that tests fail in CI. "rule that there must be 1 commit just introducing a test that fails on CI for bugfix PRs"
- dtech 4y agoGiven the cost a typical CI system vs the salary cost of a typical dev, the business case should be fairly easy that devs always should have CI capacity available.