Peter Dimov writes:
Douglas Gregor wrote:
We have > 700 regressions and > 3000 failures showing up in the regression tests. Library authors, please review the regression test summaries for your libraries and start fixing bugs. If there are bugs that cannot be fixed for release (due to broken compilers, the need for huge changes to the library, etc.), mark them as expected failures or mark the library as "unusable" in status/explicit-failures-markup.xml.
Question: what should I do if a test failure does not render the library unusable, but I don't want to mark the failure as "expected" because I _never_ expect failures. ;-)
Peter, I'd really like to finally make your dissatisfaction with the current markup rules go away, but in order to come up with a resolution that we all can agree on I need to understand your use case, so please bear with me while I'm trying to achieve that :). 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? -- Aleksey Gurtovoy MetaCommunications Engineering