river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Patrick Wright <pdoubl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ServiceDiscoveryManager test coverage
Date Wed, 01 Sep 2010 09:52:11 GMT
As an external, non-committing but interested observer, I agree with
Patricia and Jonathan. The team I've been working with switched to
using branches extensively in the last year. Developers open branches
"per feature" and synchronize/pull from trunk as stable changes are
merged into trunk. Code reviews can also be done before the
integration merge. In our case, we also serialize integrations so that
as a rule no integration takes place when trunk is unstable, e.g. as
soon as an integration breaks trunk, it's rolled back as a unit, trunk
is re-verified, and the developer gets in line to try again later.

River is a bit unusual by current testing standards IMO as the test
suites take a very long time to run, making integration a bigger
effort. It seems like current best practice regarding testing is to
rely more on mocking and to keep tests running in as short a time as
possible, to receive feedback quickly. It does look like a few
person-days of work were just lost by having to track down and isolate
the failures.


View raw message