From: Alisdair Meredith (alisdair.meredith_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-07 18:04:51
Rene Rivera wrote:
> Count me in that "us" ;-\
> Don't know if different people ran it or not. But it is simply that one has
> a different file name, from an old run, and the table is sorted strictly on
> the file name of the results.
If the old run is no longer relevent (as run date October 17 suggests)
who would be responsible for removing it?
> I've been trying to figure out a good way to show that some test are newer
> than others, because sorting by date is not possible, and I like that
> suggestion very much :-] I'd prefer a bit more granularity than you suggest
> though. How'bout this:
> GREEN -- tests ran in the last 48 hours.
> YELLOW -- tests ran in the last 7 days.
> RED -- tests ran in the last 14 days.
> BLACK -- tests are older than 14 days.
I tend to like default (black) text to indicate there is no error, and
only colour-code things that need attention. In your scheme it is the
reverse, black being an 'abandoned' test suite.
I'll leave it to the regression-reporters to work out the right
granularity though, it's easy to be the touch-line quarterback on these
issues ;¬ )
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk