Re: [Boost-testing] [RudbekAssociates-V2] Long time since last update

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-07-03 11:32:28

on Tue Jul 03 2007, Joaquin M Lopez Munoz <joaquin-AT-tid.es> wrote:

>> I'm not convinced it is a good idea to rerun the tests until the results 
>> look good, if the testing site is known to work reliably (as it is the 
>> case for Victor's). Doing so simply hides a known issue. One could call 
>> that lying about the quality of the software tested.
>
> What can we do then? It's not possible to mark the thing as
> expected failure unless we mark every possible test in that way,
> since the problem pops up anywhere --I've seen it at no less
> than ten different spots one time or another.

Hmm, that definitely changes things.  Can you offer more detail?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
http://www.boost-consulting.com
The Astoria Seminar ==> http://www.astoriaseminar.com