From: Emil Dotchevski (emil_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-16 03:40:04
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 1:25 AM, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Emil Dotchevski wrote:
>> That it is a bad idea to avoid testing an (even stable) library
>> against the (unstable) trunk just because this may produce bogus
> I don't see my proposal as avoiding testnig. In my proposal
> the each library runs all its tests. When merged into release
> ALL the tests are run there by detected any unintentional
> and/or unannounced / unaddressed interface changes. All the tests being
> run now are run under my proposal. Its just that the testing
> procedure more effectively uses the available resources
> and better serves developers.
Then perhaps I didn't understand your proposal. Can you clarify the following:
a) Testing on the trunk is not as helpful as it should be. My
tests results fluctuate all the time as changes in other libraries
ripple through to my tests.
Proposal:All tests for a particular library should be run against
the latest or next release.
I read it as you don't want to test against trunk and instead you want
to test against the last and the next release.
Reverge Studios, Inc.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk