From: Victor A. Wagner Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-07 11:12:06
At Monday 2005-03-07 07:02, you wrote:
>"Victor A. Wagner Jr." <vawjr_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > At Sunday 2005-03-06 18:52, you wrote:
> >> Let's start revving up to release Boost 1.33.0. Personally, I'd like
> >> to get it out the door by mid-April at the latest, and I'm offering
> >> to manage this release.
> > thank you for your offer, but if you don't get the damned regression
>Please keep your language civil.
Hi Dave, thank's for the kind lesson in political correctness.
I'll give it all the attention I give all "PC" edicts.
BTW, rule #1 is "get the student's attention" and for sure we needed to get
Results are more important than someone's feelings, IMO.
> > testing working FIRST (it's been non-responsive
>Can you please be more specific about what has been non-responsive? I
>doubt anyone can fix anything without more information.
Here's a lesson in using your brain.
If you'd looked at the meta-comm regression page any time since Friday
morning (see the paste below) you would have seen that nothing was
changing. That's what "non-responsive" means.
if you'd been reading the boost-testing echo, you would have noticed that I
commented that the regression results weren't being updated (so did
Rene)....nada/zip/zilch for response
Yes, I'm hostile, I don't need some "kid" telling me how to communicate (I
I _do_ note that it seems to be working now (approximately 1530 UT on
Monday March 7)... well sorta.
Now that we have a dialog going:
I also note that I _still_ cannot check the results of the changes I made
Thursday night to localtime_test because although the webpage asserts
localtime_test failed on my machine (it does, for some reason, in their
<sarcasm> infinite wisdom and desire to innovate</sarcasm> Microsoft have
apparently decided that attempting to format any date before 1900 will
cause an exception) when I click on the "fail" link, I get a "page missing"
(not particularly useful).
I further note that there are some "white spaces" the regression results
show for me. IF we're going to have automated testing, then someone _else_
has to do something so that _all_ of the results show up. My tests are run
using "scheduled tasks" on a windows XPpro system, every 6 hours under
their own logon (clicking on the RudbekAssociates link will tell you more
than you want to know). I've done everything I can think of thus far to
make them completely automatic, which is the _only_ rational way to run
regression tests. As soon as you _require_ manual intervention you run the
risk (probability 1) that your results will be inaccurate.
Let's get the regression test system up to snuff.
Let's make it completely "hands off" for the persons volunteering their
(personal & computer) time to run the tests.
in other words: Let's get it right
> > since Report Time: Fri, 04
> > Mar 2005 06:30:29 +0000.... that's SEVENTY-TWO (72) hours), you're not
> > gonna have any testers.
>Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Victor A. Wagner Jr. http://rudbek.com
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
"There oughta be a law"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk