On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:49 PM, L. David Baron <dba...@dbaron.org> wrote:
> On Friday 2015-03-13 15:34 -0700, Gregory Szorc wrote: > > 1. Create a commit that introduces a new test > > 2. Test it > > 3. Create a commit that purportedly fixes the test > > 4. Build > > 5. Test and verify > > 6. Fold the commits > > Sure, that's what I'd do in an ideal world. But in reality I > sometimes start with 3 (especially if it's a bug that I notice by > code inspection), at which point the obvious order to do the rest of > the steps quickly and correctly is 1-2-4-5. (And I prefer not to do > 6, actually, and to order the test as the earlier commit and then > have the code patch actually remove the todo/fails annotation.) > (I prefer to leave the commits separate as well - didn't want to add the complication.) If you start with 3, why can't you reorder the commits? Is this a case of "rebuilds take too long and I prefer the build system didn't add overhead?" _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
