Re: [boost] Release Tools Analysis Part II: Developer Feedback Systems

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-09-05 16:55:08

on Wed Sep 05 2007, Jason Sankey <jason-AT-zutubi.com> wrote:

> Certainly, this is the idea in general.  Software development teams are 
> usually capable of creating their own automated build system, but it 
> costs a lot of labour that is better spent on other things.  The only 
> real advantage to rolling your own is the complete customisability.  I 
> am confident that a lot of what you need will come out of the box with 
> Pulse.  Also, since part of the idea from our end is to push the 
> boundaries of Pulse, we will be available to add features that are required.
>
> I can't promise immediate addition of all requested features (it is 
> clearly not practical) but if there are showstoppers we will address 
> them.

The main things that absolutely need to be there are:

1. support for the explicit/expected failure markup that is currently
   stored at http://boost.org/status/explicit-failures-markup.xml and
   integrated with our results display as described in my 
   posting at the beginning of this part of the thread.

2. support for determining which tests have regressed since the
   previous release.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com
The Astoria Seminar ==> http://www.astoriaseminar.com