Beman Dawes wrote:
At 09:36 AM 2/2/2004, David Abrahams wrote:
Luckily some of the people running Boost's regression tests run those tests too. It seems wrong to me that they should be left out of the default testing regime, which is run on many more compilers than the authors/maintainers of those libraries can possibly test directly.
Yes.
I think we need a major upgrade to our testing infrastructure. I'd like to see a machine (perhaps running both Win XP and Linux using a virtual machine manager) constantly running Boost regression tests. The tests should be segmented into sets, including an "everything we've got set", with some sets running more often than others. As previously discussed, one set should be a "quicky test" that runs very often, and that developers can temporarily add a test to that they are concerned about.
I'm all for that... One of the reasons I don't run more Boost tests is the length of time they take.
I can round-up a donation of a nice modern machine to run the tests on. That isn't hard when powerful boxes go for $1,000 or less. But I can't host here because I only have a metered ISDN Internet connection. So we would need a volunteer for that. Again, we can probably find someone.
And what prevents me from dedicating a machine to running tests is no budget for such a dedicated machine. I already pay for an unmettered DSL connection.
The key volunteers needed would be people who are comfortable setting up and remote administering such a test setup. More than one would be needed so that no one person becomes a bottleneck.
Am I dreaming, or is this something we should actively persue?
All dreams should be pursued, or at least thought about ;-) -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com - 102708583/icq