Re: [boost] [testing] Refactoring serialization tests, and possibly others.

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-26 10:16:04

David Abrahams wrote:
> "Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> I should note that the serialization library changes only very
>> infrequently - maybe once every few weeks.
>>
>> I would question re-runing the serialization library tests just
>> because something that the serialization library depends upon
>> changes.
>
> We can talk about global policy changes after you fix the emergency.
> It's a lot harder to change the way we do testing and the rest of our
> infrastructure than it is for you to simply reduce the number of tests
> being run.

> Please do what's required to bring the overall Boost testing time back
> down to something reasonable.

I can do this.  Should this be RC_1_33_0 or head?

>> A main cause of this problem bjam dependency analysis re-runs all
>> tests on Library X even if library X hasn't changed.
>
> No it doesn't.

Yes it does.

Here is the scenario.  Library X uses something from library Y. Library Y is 
changed.  This triggers a rebuild on Library X.  This in turn triggers a 
re-build and re-test on Library X.  At least that's way it looks like it 
works to me.  If I'm wrong about this, then why is so much time being 
consumed on re-testing when none of the source code in Library X 
(serialization) has changed ?

> To reiterate:

>   Anything that makes it very difficult and/or expensive for a tester
>   to complete a testing run needs to be fixed rather urgently.

Well, its been this way for almost a year.  And it has been inconvenient. 
But its hard to justify characterization as an urgent emergency.

Robert Ramey