From: Rene Rivera (grafik.list_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-21 21:59:32
David Abrahams wrote:
> "Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>Agree -- I think the big blocker here is expanding the set of regression
>>testers during this period.
> This is part of why I think BuildBot is a good idea.
But Buildbot can't solve it all on it's own. I'm sure that many Boost
users would like to help out with resources but they only have a small
amount CPU access to give. So running tests for 5-8 hours is preventing
from getting resources we could otherwise have. Letting people test
smaller parts of Boost is one way to entice those people to donate such
>>That might be a good first step. I notice that sourceforge seems to
>>be generating some sort of email when I check-in, but I don't know
>>of a way to subscribe to the changelist.
> We can set up a mailing list for it to send to, if you want to see
> those. But I don't think that would solve the problem by itself.
There's already a mail list it's sending to, and one can subscribe to
it. But no, it would not solve the problem. Just because you can see the
check ins doesn't help if you can't match them to test failures.
>>>The ability to request testing of a branch might go a long
>>>way toward eliminating that sort of problem.
Yes. And this is something that could be done with Buildbot. Currently
there's a very simple "request a build" page which could be expanded to
allow indication of branch and library to rebuild.
-- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com - 102708583/icq
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk