[vtk-developers] Continuous Build Defect Process

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Pat Marion <pat.marion at kitware.com> wrote:
> This is great, Bill.  Thanks to everyone who helped out!
>
> The statement on the wiki "Once reduced to 0, developer diligence is needed
> to keep the defects to 0. The burden is on the Gerrit reviewers"  I agree
> with the first statement, but not the second.  I think that the best way to
> keep the number at 0 is to have a next & master branch model.
>
I disagree with your second statement, and think that getting the
CDash at Home submissions to zero is necessary. Once that is done the
burden is on the Gerrit reviewers (and submitters) to keep the number
at zero. If more issues come out on a nightly dashboard then they
should of course be addressed.

I don't see how adding next would significantly improve our process if
we already build and vet topic branches before they are merged. The
CDash at Home and master/next approach both attempt the same thing in
different ways (with Qt having a third variation of a short-lived next
in their integration branch before merging).

Marcus