Re: [boost] regressions: release or not release?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-20 10:47:25

Aleksey Gurtovoy <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Arkadiy Vertleyb writes:
>> There seem to exist certain inconsistency between which compilers
>> are marked as "required" in explicit-failures-markup.xml, and how
>> often the regressions are run on these compilers. 
>
> Some, yes, in particular because the list hasn't been updated yet for
> the upcoming release.
>
>> For example, for a long time there has been no results for msvc or
>> vc-7_0.
>
> They are back online now and will stay that way.
>
>> The cw-8_3 appeared in the regression tables some time ago (adding
>> 20 or so failures to the typeof test results), had the regressions
>> run a couple of times, and vanished (probably somebody removed the
>> old results).
>
> We were actually thinking about permanently dropping out cw-8_3 from
> our tests, but I guess following the principle of not dropping support
> without giving one release worth of warning means that we should stick
> with it for one more round.
>
> Hmm, David, is there a chance you could pick this one up from us?
> Alternatively, we can pick it up ourselves if somebody takes MSVC
> 6.5/7.0 from us (we would like to keep our regression cycle under 12
> hours to provide a more or less adequate "feedback time").

I could in theory do any of these.  I will have to wipe a linux
machine (I'm not using currently) and install Windows on it, though.
VC7 got wiped off my disk and I think I don't have install disks
anymore, so I have to get someone to send it to me.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com