develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from September 2003

Re: 5.8.2 and onwards

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Abe Timmerman
Date:
September 27, 2003 07:04
Subject:
Re: 5.8.2 and onwards
Message ID:
200309271612.27556.abe@ztreet.demon.nl
Op een zonnige herfstdag (Saturday 27 September 2003 15:14), schreef Nicholas 
Clark:

> On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 01:24:00PM +0200, Abe Timmerman wrote:
> > Op een zonnige herfstdag (Saturday 27 September 2003 12:28), schreef
> > Nicholas
> >
> > Clark:
> > > Maybe controversial and undiplomatic, but
> > >
> > > 1: reduce traffic on p5p by not sending 100% pass smoke reports
> >
> > Would you like me to think of a way to try and manage that from
> > Test::Smoke?
>
> Yes please, if you could
>
> I can think of two options
>
> The simpler would be to provide a configure option to Cc: an address only
> if the smoke has failures in the matrix (for some value of fail)
> I think that in itself this would be useful (but only experience will tell)

That was sort of my first thought too.
I think I can manage that rather soonish and have a 1.18.07 release.

> The more sophisticated is if the smoke can store the state of the previous
> results matrix, and only report if the state changes (probably including
> changes in which configurations failed, maybe not down to the level of
> the individual tests. Not sure).

Fixing failures would mean sending OK reports to p5p?

Judging by the number of bug reports I got from smokers that didn't want to 
use the archive function, chances look slim we can trust there are previous 
results (or should we make archiving mandatory?).

This could be integrated in the development of the 1.19 sersies.

Good luck,

Abe
-- 
Rafael> Actually you're thinking aloud, here ?
Yes?
No?
Maybe?
                                   -- Jarkko Hietaniemi on p5p @ 2003-02-17


Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About