From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-05 17:13:05
Beman Dawes wrote:
> As an experiment, I've got a script that is checking svn every 15
> minutes, and if there is a change, running the regression tests and
> uploading results to a web site.
> For current VC++ results, see
> On these runs the reporting is set to show a row only if the results are
> something other than a simple "pass" without link.
> For slightly outdated Linux results, see
> Here the results show all tests, regardless of result.
> The idea is to supplement the regular regression tests at
> with rapid turnaround tests on a few major platforms, aimed at giving
> developers quick response as they try to fix bugs affecting platforms
> they don't have access to. At the current level failures, the Win32
> tests are turning around in 11 minutes while the Linux tests turn in 4
> minutes. Thus worst case developers can see test results in 26 minutes!
> It seems to me this might be helpful to developers. Opinions?
I think this would be very valuable.
> Presumably in regular use the upload would go to a centralized site. Or
> maybe decentralization is useful for reliability; a boost web page could
> contain links. Opinions on that?
Decentralization is fine with me, but there needs to be something on the
boost site that points to all of them.
> Which reporting do you prefer? My preference is just to show the tests
> with something to report.
I like to see all the tests -- just so that I know they were actually run.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk