From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: [BUG] ob-sql.el: probably an extra paren Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 08:36:34 +0100 Message-ID: <87fvznzy0t.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <16047.1363748067@alphaville> <86vc8mtfcx.fsf@somewhere.org> <87fvzqnpfd.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87fvzozx88.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87ehf84osd.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60083) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UIwWk-0006bI-6P for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 03:36:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UIwWi-0005WN-W5 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 03:36:38 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c03::22d]:55510) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UIwWi-0005WH-P7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 03:36:36 -0400 Received: by mail-we0-f173.google.com with SMTP id x51so2917191wey.4 for ; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 00:36:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Achim Gratz's message of "Fri, 22 Mar 2013 08:01:30 +0100") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Achim Gratz Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Achim Gratz writes: > Am 21.03.2013 18:59, schrieb Bastien: >> Please see my reply to Yagnesh. >> >> It clearly describes a situation where automatically running tests >> with a pre-push hook would be a problem. > > You keep mentioning a pre-push-hook to be run on the developers > machine. That's what have been proposed by Sébastien: Isn't it possible to put such in some sort of Git pre-commit hook (or pre-push hook), so that it gets automatically enforced? He was replying to Nick who proposed that developers always run make test before pushing. > However, the test would run on the server and determine whether to > accept the commit into the repo or not. I'm fine with a server-based solution. > All your further arguments seem to > be based on that misunderstanding, so I won't comment on them. Maybe the server-side solution was so obvious to you that you didn't realize we (Sébastien, Nick, me) were discussing something else. So I'll just assume you agree with my argument against the developer-side pre-push hook then, good. > As for Travis CI: a website that shows absolutely nothing when JavaScript > is turned off? No, thanks. Do you know any free (as-in-speech), easy-to-use alternative? -- Bastien