Timeline for How many developers before continuous integration becomes effective for us?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 22, 2012 at 13:45 | comment | added | philosodad | Well, no, its practice. Over time, you make a note of what tests are fragile and what tests aren't, and you don't worry too much if your fragile tests break unless they break several times in a row. You write more isolated, robust tests as you learn how, and you let legacy coverage build over time instead of doing it all at once. In practice, CI is a not a silver bullet, its a process change that takes time and eventually leads to less buggy software. | |
| Apr 5, 2011 at 16:54 | comment | added | Phil Helix | Yes, this is theory | |
| Apr 3, 2011 at 9:39 | comment | added | Stephen Bailey | Yes, you need to have the time to pay back the setup and learning curve costs. In theory you should over time learn how to eliminate the false alarms. | |
| Apr 3, 2011 at 7:37 | comment | added | Phil Helix | So length of the project (size of project) is important for you CI? I have found the false alarms to be very costly. | |
| Apr 2, 2011 at 10:38 | history | answered | Stephen Bailey | CC BY-SA 2.5 |