Boost Testing :
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-08-05 23:32:33
David Abrahams wrote:
> on Tue Aug 05 2008, Eric Niebler <eric-AT-boost-consulting.com> wrote:
>>> A similar tool that looked at web sites would be a nice QA
>>> addition. It would check for the presence of specified files and
>>> verify their date was recent, for a definition of recent specific to
>>> each file. Maybe check file size, too, or even some content.
>> OK, but that doesn't address the concern about test
>> reporting. Currently, it takes a human (you, Rene, people on the
>> boost-testing list) to manually verify that the results are being
> I think the way we're displaying these results has a lot to do with the
> problem. A display like http://bitten.edgewall.org/build/trunk would
> show us continuously and immediately if some platform's tests were not
> up-to-date. It's totally unworkable that someone has to notice that one
> or more platforms haven't posted results in a while.
Hm, AFAIK that is an inaccurate statement. Bitten can't give you
immediate results. It works on a batch model, albeit on a shorter cycle
than our current system. One system that does have immediate results is
BuildBot, for example <http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/>.
-- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail