Boost logo

Boost :

From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-04 12:46:15

Douglas Gregor wrote:

> Look at the 1.34 release series... the thing that's been holding us
> back most of all is that the testing and test reporting tools are
> broken. 1.34.1 is stalled because we have failures on one platform,
> but nobody can see what those failures actually are: the test
> reporting system removed all of the important information.
> I agree with most of Beman's write-up, but it pre-supposes a robust
> testing system for Boost that just doesn't exist. I hypothesize that
> the vast majority of the problems with our release process would go
> away without a single change to our process, if only we had a robust
> testing system. We have only so much volunteer time we can spend. At
> this point, I think our best bet is to spend it making the regression
> testing infrastructure work well; then we can move on to a new
> process with its new tools.

I know I'm asking for the moon, but it would be really nice if
developers have access to a compiler farm like the one SourceForge
has but for all compilers that Boost uses. I know there are
legal impediments, but such a thing, if plausible at all, would
alleviate most of our testing woes. If something breaks, we
can test it ourself and see the results immediately and fix it
immediately instead of having to wait a day or two for a full
test suite to complete. The current system is like having a
compiler that takes 2 days to compile.

2c worth... but I thought I'd say it again :P


Joel de Guzman

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at