Recently I forgot to add #reviewthis directive for modifications of codebase that belongs to team A. And a subtle bug was introduced that way. Ops! I agreed earlier that all changes done to moduleB should be passed to a reviewer that will do peer review for that particular change. What a shame 
(We are using excellent GitHub’s review mechanism, BTW).
How to avoid that situation in a future? Should I rely on my memory? Is it possible for a human to track so many small rules manually? My intuition tells me that enforcement of those small ruleset should be automated.
GIT allows you to specify so called “commit hooks” that can validate many stages of GIT workflow. I’ll use simplest local verification of commit message, first the rule in plain text:
If you are changing moduleB you should notify developerC about this change
(more…)
My current project I’m working on is based on embedded systems and QT platform. Of course the very first task in the project is to implement some kind of testing method to get feedback on software quality. The test system is composed from few components:
- Automatic crash reports collected on central server
- Automatic random test runners connected to always-running (24/7) devices to catch crashes
First channel collects all crashes (from human and automated tests), second channel is performed fully automatically. Second channel allows to measure MMTF (mean time between failures) and analyse changes in time, probably helping with estimating current software quality state.
Second testing channel requires automatic test driver to inject random UI events (key presses, remote in my case). I used QT message queue for that purpose:
(more…)
