Re: [boost] Google SOC 2007, Boost.Test Frontend

From: Bjørn Roald (bjorn_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-21 16:44:23

Stefan Seefeld wrote:
> Bjørn Roald wrote:
>   
>> Younes M wrote:
>>     
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I recently came across a suggestion for a Boost.Test frontend on the
>>> Google Summer of Code 2007 front page. As someone who uses Boost.Test
>>> a fair bit I think I would be very interested in persuing this. I have
>>> some early ideas about what I would like to see in a frontend, but
>>> would also love to get some ideas from others.
>>>   
>>>       
>> To me functionality similar to http://cruisecontrol.sourceforge.net/ 
>> comes to mind.  I don't know if this counts as *front-end* to Boost.Test 
>> in this context, but I would give it a look.
>>
>> Basically the CruiseControl software detect events such as commits in 
>> the revision control system upon which build and test runs are 
>> launched.  After completion reports are generated and notifications are 
>> given to subscribing developers.  The connection to Boost.Test is in the 
>> reporting and test launch part I guess.  I guess signaling to multiple 
>> build/test hosts could be part of it or a future extension.  Various SCM 
>> such as cvs, subversion, perforce, clear-case, sccs, rcs, etc. should be 
>> supported by future plug-ins, for now a single plug-in for cvs, 
>> subversion, or whatever will do :-)
>>     
>
> Isn't that exactly what buildbot does (http://buildbot.sf.net)?
> Rene Riviera already did some work a long time ago to provide a buildbot
> harness for boost.org, which, I agree, would be very useful to lift into
> official part of the boost infrastructure, especially in support of the
> regression testing harness.
>   

I did not know of buildbot.  It looks like the same basic idea.  The 
problem with cruisecontrol is that it likes the Ant config.xml files.  
This is only Ok if you use Ant :-(

I will have a look at buildbot when time permits, thanks :-)

>> It may be smart to consider splitting this into more than one project to 
>> keep the scope creep out.
>>     
>
> Heh, you are the one deviating from the original topic, and now you warn
> about feature creep. :-)
>   
Yeh, that is me!

-- 
Bjørn