From: Thomas Witt (witt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-02-09 11:11:58
First and foremost thanks to you and everybody else involved for all the
work that went into this!
Vladimir Prus wrote:
> This is the summary of regression results as I see it:
> I think the right way to get 1.34 released now, as far
> as regression tests are concerned is this:
> 1. Completely freeze the list of tested compilers. This
> means that anything not tested now is not tested. Notably,
> we'll have no coverage for mingw or cygwin versions of gcc.
Agreed. Are you going to update the list of toolsets in
explicit-failures-markup.xml or should I do it?
> 2. Have me and Roland fix stlport issues.
Can you give us a heads-up when the config related issues are sorted out
so that we have a chance to look at the remaining issues?
> 3. Start pinging developers about remaining failures. I think
> we should adopt a policy that will guarantee that all failures
> be resolved in a reasonable time -- namely, if a failure is not
> fixed by a certain date, it's marked expected and we move on.
> That cut-off date might be two weeks from the next Monday
> -- Feb 26.
> Both (1) and (3) will certainly have an effect on release quality
> -- we'll mark some failures as expected instead of fixing them,
> and we won't see failures on some configuration. However, I believe
> having a release sooner is more important at this point.
All too true. That being said I believe that the quality implications
are probably negligible.
-- Thomas Witt witt_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk