> I also wonder whether it is worth it? Are all developers really blocked when the build fails?
In our setup building the deployment artifacts is contingent on tests passing so if the build isn't passing, no one can deploy.
But you could build and test the candidate master branch before it actually becomes the master branch...
Re:Please stop breaking the build
by johan_larson on Sunday March 15, 2015 @01:59PM
(#9207347)
Three nines is way beyond what I have seen. At most places I have worked, the build was broken for an hour or two each day.
There was one place where the official builds had been broken for so long that people stopped paying attention to them. The new dev director put a stop to that, to his credit.
I remember a larger project where we struggled for a longer time to anywhere beyond 20%. Eventually we got a lot better but nowhere near 99%.
I also wonder whether it is worth it? Are all developers really blocked when the build fails? Some yes but if I could I would design the production chain that most would not be.
Isn't there a trade-off in how much to invest into build tooling and automation vs. in functionality? Does building a MVP include building a perfect software production pipeline?