From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-19 20:12:55
"Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 21:32:46 -0600, Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote
>> Jeff Garland writes:
>> > Do we have the results of the 1.32 regression tests somewhere?
>>
>>
> http://www.meta-comm.com/engineering/boost-regression/1_32_0/developer/summary_release.html
>> (http://tinyurl.com/6ysmd)
>
> Thanks!
>
>> > Anyway, it be really nice to snapshot the final test web pages and
>> > include them in the release package.
>>
>> This was the intention all along, but it was never carried out in the
>> release race.
>
> Fair enough -- I was almost afraid to ask since I hate to make the release
> process any harder than it is now.
Agreed, it's too hard, but that shouldn't stop us from talking about
what we would be doing in an ideal world. Accordingly:
- A health report for the latest release should always be available
on the website.
- Regressions from the previous release are nice to know but less
important. I realize we show both in one report, but this may
help us adjust our emphasis or coloring (maybe it's already
perfect in the user report; I don't know)
- A health report for the current state of the repository should
always be available on the website.
- Regressions from the previous release are crucial to know also
- When we branch for a release, we absolutely must track the release
branch, but we also should be continuing to display the health of
the trunk
- We ought to have a system for automatically notifying anyone who
checks in a regression, and displaying information about the
change responsible for the regression on the status page.
- There should be a way for a developer to request testing of a
particular branch/set of revisions
- There should be enough computing power to handle all these tests
in a timely fashion.
We also need to discuss how the main trunk will be treated. Gennadiy
has suggested in the past that checking in breaking changes to the
trunk is a perfectly legitimate technique for test-driven development.
I agree in principle, but that idea seems to generate a lot of
friction with other developers trying to stabilize their test
results. The ability to request testing of a branch might go a long
way toward eliminating that sort of problem.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com