[Nautilus-list] eazel-hacking dilemma

[Ramiro Estrugo <ramiro eazel com>]

The eazel-hacking dilemma is that on the one hand we want folks to make
it better and contribute cool stuff for it, most definitely.

On the other we don't want to discourage folks from making eazel-hacking
better by having burdensome requirements to make changes to it.

In particular the issue has to do with testing changes.

Here is the insane procedure that I follow when I make changes to eazel
hacking no matter how seemingly innocuous the change might be (I confess
I've strayed once in a while):

1.  clobber build on redhat 7.0 (update && rebuild-all -c)
2.  depend build on redhat 7.0 (update && rebuild)
3.  clobber build on redhat 6.2 (update && rebuild-all -c)

And even then I screw things up more than I'd like to admit.

It is a painful thing to do and very time consuming.  It could take
hours to do these builds.  I have more than one computer and I usually
can do this in parallel with real work.

Even though this is time consuming, it is nothing compared to the time
wasted by the WHOLE team when things go wrong.

I really hate to impose that kind of requirement on folks making
eazel-hacking changes, so im open to suggestions as to what we can agree
on that is reasonable.

Would a clobber (rebuild-all -c) build be ok ?

-re