From: Rene Rivera (grafik666_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-07 18:26:06
[2003-02-07] Alisdair Meredith wrote:
>Rene Rivera wrote:
>> Don't know if different people ran it or not. But it is simply that one
>> a different file name, from an old run, and the table is sorted strictly
>> 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 would think the person who ran the test, or Beman, or David, or any admin,
>> I've been trying to figure out a good way to show that some test are
>> 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
>> 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.
Ah, sorry that was my mistake. I really meant to keep your colors with just
the changed increments :-\ -- So it would be BLACK for 48 hours, and so on.
-- grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- rrivera_at_[hidden] - grafik_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk