Re: [boost] Re: Regression report for Releases?

From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-22 22:18:22

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 08:46:07 -0600, Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote
>
> I'm not sure how typical it is, though. For instance, I know that, as
> Boost users, here at Meta we care for more than one platform and for
> more than one compiler on each platform, and I'm sure that we are not
> the only mutli-platform folks out there.

No doubt.
 
> > I think that the big result grid, and the results by library only
> > really help the library developers.
> 
> One advantage of a "big grid" is that when things are well (and when
> we release, they are :), it inspires significant confidence in
> quality and portability of the libraries. For instance, as a user, I
> find this one is very inspiring:
>
http://www.meta-comm.com/engineering/boost-regression/1_32_0/developer/summary_release.html

I find this view very misleading.  It glosses over the fact that the developer
has indicated some parts of a library may not be available for a particular
compiler/platform.  As an example, it might lead you to believe that all
features of date_time are available on gcc 2.95.3 which just isn't the case.
 
> > So if we are wishing for things to happen, I'd say to change the
> > user reports so that it presents single toolset results
> > individually.
> 
> I'd hate to loose a user-oriented "big picture", but if we are
> targeting primarily _release_ user reports, we can have both.

Agree -- I just need to find time to write my little script ;-)

Jeff