Re: Doc: Contributor's: Update Regression tests (issue1545043)

[Carl . D . Sorensen]

Reviewers: Graham Percival,

Message:
Thanks for the review.

I've posted a new version.

Thanks,

Carl



http://codereview.appspot.com/1545043/diff/1/2
File Documentation/contributor/programming-work.itexi (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/1545043/diff/1/2#newcode1305
Documentation/contributor/programming-work.itexi:1305:


I agree.  This is part of the stuff that was just "dumped somewhere", as
you asked in your earlier email.  I think it belongs in a separate
chapter on the build system, as I mentioned before, rather than buried
in chapter 3.

http://codereview.appspot.com/1545043/diff/1/3
File Documentation/contributor/regressions.itexi (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/1545043/diff/1/3#newcode32
Documentation/contributor/regressions.itexi:32:
On 2010/06/08 12:50:23, Graham Percival wrote:
> I'd either leave the "output of the regtests is also
automatically...", or else
> remove the `automaticaly' and have "output of the regtests can be
checked...".

> Basically, the regtest comparison is generated by automatically
comparing two
> sets of lilypond output, but the comparison should be / could be
checked
> manually.  (hmm, maybe we should just add a third sentence, explain
the whole
> thing, and not try to condense it into a single sentence)

I expanded to indicate three uses:  1) Successful completion; 2)
Description matches graphical output; 3) Comparison between different
versions.  I also indicated that the comparison is automatic, but the
checking is manual.

http://codereview.appspot.com/1545043/diff/1/3#newcode40
Documentation/contributor/regressions.itexi:40:
On 2010/06/08 12:50:23, Graham Percival wrote:
> Why @ignore this stuff?  It looks accurate, it looks good for an
overview of the
> situation.  If you don't want to explain it in the intro (I'm willing
to listen
> to reasons), then please remove it entirely.


I don't agree with the statement "The latter is recommended", and I
hadn't yet decided if I was going to pitch the whole thing, although I
was leaning that way.

I've adjusted this and removed the ignore.

http://codereview.appspot.com/1545043/diff/1/3#newcode55
Documentation/contributor/regressions.itexi:55:
On 2010/06/08 12:50:23, Graham Percival wrote:
> Link to latest (complete, non-comparison'd) regtests?

Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/1545043/diff/1/3#newcode68
Documentation/contributor/regressions.itexi:68: the current release and
the prior release.  Each test that has
On 2010/06/08 12:50:23, Graham Percival wrote:
> Somewhere... I think in the "releases" chapter... I noted that the
comparison
> only looks inside the bounding boxes within lilypond, so errors due to
> ghostscript aren't found, nor are errors in lyrics+text.

> I don't know exactly what I'm talking about, but it's probably adding
a @warning
> that not **all** of the changes will be shown.

Done.

http://codereview.appspot.com/1545043/diff/1/3#newcode157
Documentation/contributor/regressions.itexi:157: The special regression
test @file{test-output-distance.ly} will always
On 2010/06/08 12:50:23, Graham Percival wrote:
> Please put this paragraph inside a @warning.

Done.

Description:
Doc: Contributor's: Update Regression tests

Please review this at http://codereview.appspot.com/1545043/show

Affected files:
  M Documentation/contributor/programming-work.itexi
  M Documentation/contributor/regressions.itexi
  M Documentation/included/compile.itexi