From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-26 14:39:08
"Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> "Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>> David Abrahams wrote:
>>>> "Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>> 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?
>> Both. We're testing them both pending the release of 1.33.1
> If I recall correctly, the idea was that there would be a release of 1.33.1
> 30 September 2005. I will be leaving town this sunday 2 October. Do we
> really want to mess with something that's been this way for a year and will
> only go on for couple more days at this time? That doesn't seem
> wise to me.
Maybe not, if 1.33.1 is actually on target for release 30 Sept. I
don't know if that's the case.
>>> 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.
>> That is correct, but what you said made it sound like X would be
>> retested unconditionally.
>> The idea that we should not be re-testing libraries when their
>> dependencies change is debatable, but that's a different discussion.
> Well, if we weren't doing that we wouldn't have a problem.
Wrong. Many testers are doing "clean run" testing that forces
everything to be retested unconditionally, specifically to avoid the
sorts of inaccuracies that we'd have if we ignore dependencies.
> So if its not the same discussion but it is related. Of course we
> can test less. But the root of the problem is that probably only a
> small percentage of the effort invested in testing is actually
> testing anything. I know I've brought this up before but made no
> headway so I won't harp on it anymore.
It's hard to understand your objection to retesting library A in
combination with a changed library B on which it depends, since that
is essentially what you're doing with the various parts of the
serialization with your N x M x K testing.
-- 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