Peter Dimov writes:
Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
I guess my question is: do you want to keep the failures yellow "for yourself" or for users of the library? If it's the former, wouldn't keeping the already known, "cannot-do-anything-about-it" failures highlighted in the report make it much harder to notice possible new failures, thus basically rendering the detailed view useless for the purpose of examining, well, a detailed regressions/failures picture?
I don't want to hide the failures in the detailed view, but the users should see a green box in the summary.
This kind of failure is not common (in the libraries I maintain). There are two such failures on the smart_ptr page, and a bit more on the bind page, but I don't think that they can mask new failures. A release should never go out with a "real" failure, only with "non-critical" failures. Once released, any new failures would be regressions and impossible to miss.
I want to keep the non-critical failures visible because they are failures. :-)
They are. They also _are_ distinguishable from passing tests -- after all, the text says "fail*". But I tend to agree that they deserve some coloring.
Any non-green color is fine with me.
OK. Thank you for your feedback, -- Aleksey Gurtovoy MetaCommunications Engineering