8 Jun
2007
8 Jun
'07
11:30 a.m.
Ames, Andreas (Andreas) wrote:
I don't think anything as radical as a VM is needed, really. Instead, the harness needs to be (incrementally) refined to
1) control as much of the development environment to which the build process is exposed
2) report all free parameters that influence the outcome.
I think this is achievable, using a buildbot setup.
Seconded.
I wonder why you don't bring your own QMTest to the table. Wouldn't it also nicely fit into the boost picture?
Oh, I did. And yes, I think it fits. However, it isn't relevant to this particular discussion about achieving test coverage and automation. Both, Rene, as well as Vladimir are aware of QMTest. Thanks, Stefan -- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...