Workflow question, advice...

[TK Soh]

On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 3:08 AM, Douglas Philips <dgou at mac.com> wrote:
>
>  On 2008 Apr 15, at 7:59 PM, TK Soh wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Mathieu Clabaut wrote:
>  >>> or this scenario, you may use the fetch extension instead :
>  >>  hg fetch
>  >> hg push
>  >
>  > One should always test after merge (and before push).
>
>  I can't speak for other people's workflows, but for the one I was
>  inquiring about that spawned this thread, I want automation to
>  do the testing if the merge is conflict free. People have better
>  things to do with their time. :)

Testing is a necessary evil. It'd be ideal if we can get it automated.
Else we just have to do it the old fashion way.

I was merely trying to point out that we should not push to the
'master' repo unless the merges are reasonably well tested. It's a
matter of good software engineering practice.

In case you wonder, this is also the reason why I don't put the commit
button on TortoseHg's merge dialog ;-)