Boost Testing :
From: Martin Wille (mw8329_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-17 14:15:56
Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
> Martin Wille writes:
>>Such an environment would consist of two result sets per runner
>>id. One set is considered "final" while the other is considered
>>"being built". Results would be uploaded per toolset into the
>>"being built" set. Eventually, that set would be committed
>>resulting in a new "final" set and a new, empty "being built"
>>set would be created.
> Hmm, does this scheme imply having two sets of reports as well?
> Otherwise I don't see how it's more incremental than the current one.
We could use two sets of reports. However, we don't need to.
If we'd display everything in a single report then we'd just
have to replace the runner-id by runner-id+setname in order
to display both sets in a single report (or replace the toolset-id
However, I guess it makes more sense to separate them. The
existing report already consists of many columns; doubling
their number wouldn't exactly increase readability.
Btw, another idea would be to use the commit-procedure to
mark differences between the old final set and the new final
set. We would then be able to spot new problems quickly.
(of course, that information would live for only for a
short time; I think it could be valuable, though)