ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steve Loughran" <>
Subject Re: Looking for a Build Philosophy
Date Thu, 17 Oct 2002 19:14:50 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Malik, Yousuff" <>
To: "'Ant Users List'" <>
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 11:18 AM
Subject: RE: Looking for a Build Philosophy

> Here are some of the best practices that I have found works
> 1)Nightly development and integration builds


> 2)You need to have different dev, int and QA branches. Clearcase is highy
> recommended.

I'm scared of clearcase. Any other SCM system gets into a mess, you cant
check in or check out code. but with clearcase the code repository on your
local system just 'disappears' till you fix it. I had one epic to cross
mount pcs to recover one box.

> 3)Schedule the nightly builds on a cron job and if a compilation error
> occurs send out an email to the developers

Cron works, cruise control and anthill work more often. They are just
fiddlier to set up. Anthill is nice and simple, even if restricted to CVS.

> 4)Create a junit repeort and mail it to the developers


> 4)No compilation errors should occur in integration builds


> 5)The build master should "NEVER" be a developer. If so then he/she would
> find ways to fix compilation errors

that may work in a big project. our philosophy is 'everyone owns the build';
so there is no one build master.

Core is not having developers break builds; by giving everyone the ability
(ant) to make the master build, and the responsibility to not check in code
that wont compile or pass the basic unit tests, you should not have a build
that breaks with compilation errors, and with a fast build process any
check-in conflicts get caught within a few minutes.

Builds still break for other reasons, of course, but for functional errors,
rather than compile errors.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message