Re: [boost] [Boost-testing] out of date release results?
on Wed Aug 06 2008, Beman Dawes <bdawes-AT-acm.org> wrote:
Eric Niebler wrote:
Beman Dawes wrote:
Eric Niebler wrote:
Just spoke with Rene about this ...
Eric Niebler wrote:
How come the "report time" on nearly every page of release test results is dated July 15th?
For example: http://www.boost.org/development/tests/release/developer/summary_release.htm...
AFAIK, that's the wrong page to be looking at. The page I use to make decisions is http://beta.boost.org/development/tests/release/developer/summary.html
Whew, thanks Beman! How do you get to that page? I go to boost.org, click on "Development", and then on "Release Summary".
I don't look at www.boost.org, because I assume it applies to the current release.
Instead I look at beta.boost.org, because I assume it applies to the release under development.
Can we expect developers (and other interested parties) to figure out that they need to look at a hidden site to find this information? And doesn't the fact that it's a beta mean that it could churn and make the results unavailable or wrong without warning? Shouldn't our most important testing results be hosted in a stable environment? It's common to have a "development" or "developers" link that takes you to materials about the unreleased code on the front page of a project's site. Sounds like the current arrangement is not very user-friendly. Can we change it? -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
David Abrahams wrote:
on Wed Aug 06 2008, Beman Dawes <bdawes-AT-acm.org> wrote:
Eric Niebler wrote:
Beman Dawes wrote:
Eric Niebler wrote:
Just spoke with Rene about this ...
Eric Niebler wrote:
How come the "report time" on nearly every page of release test results is dated July 15th?
For example: http://www.boost.org/development/tests/release/developer/summary_release.htm...
AFAIK, that's the wrong page to be looking at. The page I use to make decisions is http://beta.boost.org/development/tests/release/developer/summary.html Whew, thanks Beman! How do you get to that page? I go to boost.org, click on "Development", and then on "Release Summary". I don't look at www.boost.org, because I assume it applies to the current release.
Instead I look at beta.boost.org, because I assume it applies to the release under development.
Can we expect developers (and other interested parties) to figure out that they need to look at a hidden site to find this information? And doesn't the fact that it's a beta mean that it could churn and make the results unavailable or wrong without warning? Shouldn't our most important testing results be hosted in a stable environment? It's common to have a "development" or "developers" link that takes you to materials about the unreleased code on the front page of a project's site.
Sounds like the current arrangement is not very user-friendly. Can we change it?
Perhaps you should read my various replies in this thread. -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
on Thu Aug 07 2008, Rene Rivera <grafikrobot-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
Can we expect developers (and other interested parties) to figure out that they need to look at a hidden site to find this information? And doesn't the fact that it's a beta mean that it could churn and make the results unavailable or wrong without warning? Shouldn't our most important testing results be hosted in a stable environment? It's common to have a "development" or "developers" link that takes you to materials about the unreleased code on the front page of a project's site.
Sounds like the current arrangement is not very user-friendly. Can we change it?
Perhaps you should read my various replies in this thread.
So sorry; I thought I had read everything. I'll go back and look. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
David Abrahams wrote:
on Wed Aug 06 2008, Beman Dawes <bdawes-AT-acm.org> wrote:
Eric Niebler wrote:
Beman Dawes wrote:
Eric Niebler wrote:
Just spoke with Rene about this ...
Eric Niebler wrote:
How come the "report time" on nearly every page of release test results is dated July 15th?
For example: http://www.boost.org/development/tests/release/developer/summary_release.htm...
AFAIK, that's the wrong page to be looking at. The page I use to make decisions is http://beta.boost.org/development/tests/release/developer/summary.html Whew, thanks Beman! How do you get to that page? I go to boost.org, click on "Development", and then on "Release Summary". I don't look at www.boost.org, because I assume it applies to the current release.
Instead I look at beta.boost.org, because I assume it applies to the release under development.
Can we expect developers (and other interested parties) to figure out that they need to look at a hidden site to find this information? And doesn't the fact that it's a beta mean that it could churn and make the results unavailable or wrong without warning? Shouldn't our most important testing results be hosted in a stable environment? It's common to have a "development" or "developers" link that takes you to materials about the unreleased code on the front page of a project's site.
Sounds like the current arrangement is not very user-friendly. Can we change it?
Good questions. Is one of the consequences of separating web site content from release content is that this becomes a question for the web site team rather than the release management team? Perhaps we should explicitly identify who the web site team is, what their responsibilities are, and where the dividing line is between release management and web site management. --Beman
on Fri Aug 08 2008, Beman Dawes <bdawes-AT-acm.org> wrote:
Can we expect developers (and other interested parties) to figure out that they need to look at a hidden site to find this information? And doesn't the fact that it's a beta mean that it could churn and make the results unavailable or wrong without warning? Shouldn't our most important testing results be hosted in a stable environment? It's common to have a "development" or "developers" link that takes you to materials about the unreleased code on the front page of a project's site.
Sounds like the current arrangement is not very user-friendly. Can we change it?
Good questions.
Is one of the consequences of separating web site content from release content is that this becomes a question for the web site team rather than the release management team?
I think it was always a question for the website team, if we ever had one ;-)
Perhaps we should explicitly identify who the web site team is, what their responsibilities are,
That's a good idea regardless. I nominate Rene ;-)
and where the dividing line is between release management and web site management.
I *think* it's less a question of dividing and more a question of how we decide what web material goes into the release. But, I'm not sure. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
participants (3)
-
Beman Dawes -
David Abrahams -
Rene Rivera