From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-24 17:41:44
"Gennadiy Rozental" <gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden]> writes:
> "Rene Rivera" <grafik.list_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>>>>The rationale behind the "timely" goal is that developers will benefit
>>>>tremendously from faster feedback, both for HEAD and active branches.
>>>>Automating the feedback will free developers from having to track what is
>>>>happening on many different platforms.
>>> Will it allow to test against non-HEAD branches? How would it work?
>> Perhaps the best response to the non-HEAD question is to post the
>> configuration for the bot I'm currently running:
>> As you can see testing on other branches is changing the "branch = HEAD"
>> option above. Not that I've tried this yet :-) So it's likely to have
>> initial problems. For those curious I added the code to the sandbox CVS
>> under boost-sandbox/tools/boostbot/.
> Arhh, I hoped it would allow me to test my staff against development
> branch. Which doesn't seems to be the case since it's buildbot administrator
> who specify branch for whole tree, not a developer in hers Jamfile.
I think developers need individual control over branch configuration
testing, but the Jamfile is the wrong place to put it. For one thing,
"test the HEAD (or the release branch if we have one)" has to be the
default during a release. Branch testing for individual developers
has to go on in parallel with the tests that check the overall health
of the CVS HEAD.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk