[boost] Re: 1.31.0 regressions

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-11 15:51:22

Jeremy Siek <jsiek_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Hi Dave,
>
> On Feb 11, 2004, at 11:16 AM, David Abrahams wrote:
>>> P.S. I fixed it in CVS head, that is. Should the fix
>>> be merged to RC_1_31_0?
>>
>> Absolutely, and ASAP, thanks!
>
> Ok.
>
>> Can you say anything about the origin of the bug, like when was it
>> introduced, and how come it didn't trigger any alarms in the
>> regression testing?
>
> My best guess is that it was triggered by the fix of a performance
> bug in remove_edge.

Ah, I remember those.

> As for triggering alarms... do we have alarms that get triggered
> automatically?
> Or do you mean, why didn't someone notice that the regression for
> Boost.Python on VC6 started failing? 

That's part 1.  Part 2 is "why didn't a graph library test start
failing as well?"

> Well, perhaps we should ask whose responsibility it is to watch the
> Boost.Python regression logs for VC6.

I doubt there's any assigned responsibility.  I was watching, but then
I had to travel and lost connectivity.  I did expect that Beman was
going to look things over and make sure there were no new regressions
before the release went out.  I hypothesize that part of the problem
is that he's not looking at the meta-comm tests, which include
Boost.Python and Spirit and show regressions against the previous
release, rather than just the last test run.  I have been worried for
some time that test effectiveness is diluted by having two
reporting/display systems... did it bite us here?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com