Boost Testing :
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-07 01:16:21
Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
> "Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
>>> "Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>>> This doesn't address neither testing against new version of your
>>> library by developers of other libraies
>> Sure it does - they can either test against the HEAD as they do now
>> or they update their local installation
> Who is going to do this? Regression testers?
>>> nor dealing with testing
>>> agains updates of component your library depends on.
>> This amounts to using the tests for one library as tests of the
>> dependent library. There are two problems with this. First
>> its very inefficient and arbitrary as the tests in my library aren't
>> presume that the rest of boost works so they aren't designed
>> to test the rest of boost. And if an error occurs then it has to
>> be determined which of the components, libraries, build
>> system, etc which are simultaneously changing is the cause
>> of the failure. This wastes huge amount of time.
>> That being said. If the rest of boost things that the serialization
>> library is a good way test the other libraries - fine with me. Its
>> not an issue for me at all.
> I am not sure how your reply relates to my comment. What I meant is:
> How can YOU test that your library works with the next version of
> let's say Boost.Test I am planning to include into next release.
> Let's say I do my development in branch new_dev. How could you test
> your lib against this branch, but allow all other libraries still to
> be tested against HEAD?
>>> Formalization of
>>> independent versioning should allow us deal with it.
>> I think boost as a concept has to change from tightly
>> coupled group of "standard" libraries to a loosely
>> coupled group of "interoperable" libraries. At its core
>> I think this is the issue. Good news is that its not something
>> that we have to agree upon. Its happening now as it
>> must as boost get beyond the scale where it can be
>> digested as a whole.
> This comment I completely agree with. I just porpose how add some
> formalization to this process.
>> Robert Ramey