Re: [Boost-testing] Dated results

From: Stefan Slapeta (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-06 08:22:38

Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
 >
 > Some runners can only afford to run regressions once a week or
 > so. Also, even one-month-old results for an exotic platform could be
 > of an interest if they are the only ones, although they probably
 > should be archived to another page or something along these lines.
 >
 > Further thoughts are welcome.

The reason for my post was that I'm currently not able to get a feeling of
what is right and what is not in boost when I look at a test matrix that
has become very large. I don't know what could help, but maybe it's just
introducing another layer on top of the current matrix where each toolset
is mentioned only once and which refers then to the detailed matrix.
Another option could be ordering the matrix by the actual test run date
from left to right and skipping the platform ordering....?

 > It has been considered and rejected exactly for the reasons that
 > Martin referred to in
 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.testing/2267.
 >
 > But once we have a more dynamic filtering of results by platform
 > etc. implemented, we could reconsider this as one of the possible view
 > options.
 >

I'm looking forward to that!

Cheers,

Stefan