
| Key: |
SFS-9
|
| Type: |
New Feature
|
| Status: |
Open
|
| Priority: |
Minor
|
| Assignee: |
Unassigned
|
| Reporter: |
Scott Lawrence
|
| Votes: |
0
|
| Watchers: |
0
|
|
If you were logged in you would be able to see more operations.
|
|
|
|
|
| Component/s: |
tracker
|
| Affects Version/s: |
None
|
| Fix Version/s: |
None
|
|
|
Original Estimate:
|
Unknown
|
Remaining Estimate:
|
Unknown
|
Time Spent:
|
Unknown
|
|
|
This one is really a question - should we change the "Blocker" status to two statuses:
"Build Failure" which means that this blocks the build from completing - a very serious situation, since it potentially blocks work unrelated to the change that introduced the problem.
"Build Warning" which means that a new warning message output from the build was introduced. I would like us move to a policy of extreme intolerance for warnings (with lots of them enabled) to enforce very clean and portable coding style; this would let us track these specially.
|
|
Description
|
This one is really a question - should we change the "Blocker" status to two statuses:
"Build Failure" which means that this blocks the build from completing - a very serious situation, since it potentially blocks work unrelated to the change that introduced the problem.
"Build Warning" which means that a new warning message output from the build was introduced. I would like us move to a policy of extreme intolerance for warnings (with lots of them enabled) to enforce very clean and portable coding style; this would let us track these specially.
|
Show » |
|