> I see some of the first results for the IBM regression testing at
> <http://beta.boost.org:8081>. I have one request, it would be good to
> configure the toolsets so that they include the version of the compiler.
> So instead of "vacpp" perhaps "vacpp-9.0".

We would prefer something like ibmxl-9.0 since the compiler has not been
branded "Visual Age" for quite some time. However, that appears to require
more changes than seems to be implied above.

We have much to learn about the regression reporting mechanism, and the
Boost development process in general.  How do we make the change you
suggest?

I was surprised by several things during our initial run for RC_1_34_0
and CVS_HEAD.  First, the regression.py that was downloaded from meta-comm
failed to upload results for RC_1_34_0 with an error that collect_logs
takes 9 args, but 10 were specified.  I collected the logs manually.  It
appears that regression.py is connected to the CVS release on which the
regression testing was done.  Is this correct?

I also was surprised that the RC_1_34_0 regression reports appeared on
<http://tinyurl.com/lawq3> but the CVS_HEAD results appeared on DART.  I am
reading though the archives to find out more information about DART.
Do you have documentation we can read?

In addition, we noticed that some of the patches for BBV2 on AIX in Trac
#583 that were applied to RC_1_34_0 were not merged to CVS_HEAD, specifically
related to python.

Chris Cambly
XL C++ Compiler Development