ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Scott Francis" <>
Subject RE: Looking for a Build Philosophy
Date Thu, 17 Oct 2002 19:41:47 GMT
Yes, I've tried it both ways myself and a lot of it really depends on the size of the development
organization and the corporate mentality there.  I've found that it's best to come in with
the "sugar" approach first and have the "vinegar" as a last resort.  At least that way you
give everyone fair warning before you are forced to pull out the big guns.

The long and the short of it is that some developers either a) don't care if the build breaks
or b) become careless of what they are doing.

I would never ever employ an attitude of going after everyone that breaks a build.  It's just
that there are certain people who always seem to have this happen no matter what you do or
say.  In these cases a little bit of managerial assistance always seems to get the ship back
on course.

As it was explained to me by one of the VP's when I first took my first CM role.  "When you
screw will always screw up big because now you have just impacted 100+ developers.
 Each hour they can't be productive is money down the drain...and we pay our developers well.
 You'll know you are doing a good job if your name is never mentioned and your phone never
rings."  I've always kept this in mind and tried to stress this to other developers.  In a
distributed computing system your carelessness does not just affect you.  It affects everyone
in the entire development organization.  If 5 more minutes worth of double checking can prevent
these us a favor and scratch our back and do it...I will be more than happy
to give ya a scratch back in the future.


-----Original Message-----
From: Dominique Devienne []
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 2:30 PM
To: 'Ant Users List'
Subject: RE: Looking for a Build Philosophy

Sadly, I'd have to concur with Scott. Treats are not enough, especially in a
distributed environment where people are in at least 3 cities, if not
working from home. We have all the right intention/process in place,
published, etc... and still people don't write test, and half the time write
so-so code. Thankfully we have nightly builds and CruiseControl running, and
things have settled down a bit, but the carrot is not enough in my mind, and
the stick should have been handled more often than not. I'm afraid nothing
will ever replace good personal code hygiene, except perhaps true XP with
pair programming to learn from your peers, and have them look over your
shoulder half the time.

PS: I used Continuus CM (old name for CM Synergy) in another lifetime, and I
loved it. It's too process-heavy as they say here...

-----Original Message-----
From: Chappell, Simon P [] 
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 2:09 PM
To: Ant Users List
Subject: RE: Looking for a Build Philosophy

>developers who are used to doing things a certain way (being 
>however they feel like doing it that day), you are going to be 
>very hard pressed to get them to change.  That being said, if 
>you can get a change in place you must also have a system in 
>which to enforce and in some cases punish those that are 
>violating the structure.  Without that good luck.  Have 
>developer performance reviews be negatively affected by 
>habitual build breakers.

Ouch! I know that we had to bring in treats if we broke the build, but that
was in fun. Your suggestion doesn't sound like fun to me.

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

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

View raw message