[Developers] Accessing current source code

[John Sibert]

Ben, Arni, et al -
Yes there is a big caveat emptor to be invoked for those who use the 
bleeding edge code (or as the practice has come to be known, eating your 
own dogfood). I routinely use the development code - checking it out and 
building it about once a week. It is seldom broken, because the test 
suite is part of the repository and you get it when you check out the 
code. It is the developer's responsibility to rebuild the libraries and 
run "make test" before committing code to the repository.

Testing is an integral part of the routine build process under the 
control of the buildbot. Every time someone commits code to the 
repository, the buildbot knows about it and automatically triggers a 
build and test (see http://www.admb-project.org/buildbot/grid for all 
the gory details).

Cheers,
John

On 08/19/2010 11:03 AM, Ben Bolker wrote:
> On 10-08-19 03:12 PM, Arni Magnusson wrote:
>    
>> Hi Ben, these are valid points.
>>
>> I'm not sure how old the 'public' SVN version is. It may date back to the
>> last formal release of ADMB 9.1 (31 Dec 2009), equivalent to downloading
>> and unzipping admb-9.1-src.zip. The reported SVN revision 74 makes no
>> sense, as version 9.1 corresponds to revision 496.
>>
>> Like you point out, this can be frustrating and undermines user
>> participation in the development of ADMB. Similar free software projects
>> have anonymous read-only access to the actual source repository, so anyone
>> can view the code in real time.
>>
>> That level of open source enforces development discipline; at any given
>> time, build errors should be very rare and quickly fixed.
>>
>> My guess is that ADMB has not reached that point, or has reached it very
>> recently. If I checkout the source code right now, I wouldn't assume that
>> it builds.
>>      
>    A minor comment:
>
>    in my opinion it's OK to have a publicly accessible development SVN
> repository that is frequently broken. That's what 'bleeding-edge' means.
> Not broken is nicer, of course, and if developers get embarrassed by
> having their dirty laundry on display and start being more careful not
> to break the development version that's great, but people who choose to
> use the development version have been warned: they should be willing to
> take what they get and/or should have the technical expertise to revert
> to a version that isn't broken.
>
>    cheers
>      Ben
>
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> Developers at admb-project.org
> http://lists.admb-project.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
>
>    

-- 
John Sibert
Emeritus Researcher, SOEST
University of Hawaii at Manoa

Visit the ADMB project http://admb-project.org/