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

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-09-13 10:48:30

on Wed Sep 12 2007, Jason Sankey <jason-AT-zutubi.com> wrote:

> OK.  I am underway, having added boost jam support and looking at the 
> best way to gather and integrate the test results.  

Fantastic!

> I was hoping that 
> there would be a way to run a full build with one or more XML test 
> reports generated (since I know that Boost.Test supports XML
> reporting). 

We can generate XML test reports, but it's not done by Boost.Test;
it's done by process_jam_log.py

>   Looking more closely I see that the current regression testing process 
> uses the normal test report format, 

What "normal test report format" are you referring to?

> which I can also integrate if generating XML proves difficult.  I'm
> still examining the current build process to try and understand the
> best way to do it, but should be up and running soon.
>
> As an aside, the output from boost jam is somewhat hostile to 
> post-processing.  One feature of Pulse is the ability to pull 
> interesting information like warnings and errors out of your build log 
> so we can summarise and highlight them in the UI.  With tools like make 
> and GCC this is fairly easy as they have a predictable and uniform error 
> message output.  Playing with boost jam I notice that the error messages 
> are quite diverse and hard to predict.  Although I added post-processing 
> rules for the errors I found, it might be worth looking into making the 
> output more machine-friendly - not just for my sake, but for any tools 
> that might want to process the output.

Rene, IIUC you already have the results capture facility implemented
that would allow this?

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