[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Regtest rating project
From: |
Phil Holmes |
Subject: |
Regtest rating project |
Date: |
Wed, 8 Aug 2012 12:27:40 +0100 |
We're getting to the time where the Grand Regression Test Checking (TM)
project
(http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/contributor/grand-regression-test-checking
) has got enough results to allow us to use it to fix poor regtests. We
therefore need to agree how to get agreement on the changes needed to the
regtests. To put it into perspective, there are over 1000 regtests, of
which 200 have been shown to need attention. My thoughts on our options:
Custom web application
================
I write an application that displays regtest images, texidoc, comments and
suggested change, and interested parties can add comments
Pros
----
Should be possible to review a lot of proposed changes reasonably quickly,
and get agreement
Cons
----
I need to write another application. Authentication likely to be a pain.
Custom app with Google authentication
==========================
Pros
----
As above, plus gets rid of authentication issue
Cons
-----
I need to learn Google auth _then_ write another application
Wiki
===
Pros
----
Should be possible/easy to set up
Cons
----
Easy to lose track. Authentication.
Use the Issue Tracker
==============
Pros
----
Feasible. Would keep everyone informed of proposed changes and allow
discussion
Cons
-----
If we use an issue per regtest, we're likely to overwhelm the team with
emails and discussion (in particular those with no specific interest in this
work) and also the Bug Squad with verifying. If we bulk up regtests into an
issue, I think it would get confusing. We could also use up all the
remaining attachment space instantly.
New Google Project
==============
This occurred to me only recently. What about setting up a new Google
Project called "LilyPond Regression Test Improvement". This would require a
new mailing list to avoid the problems above. We could then add an issue
per regtest, and only people who want to subscribe would need to subscribe
to the list.
I think the final suggestion is my favoured one.
--
Phil Holmes
- Regtest rating project,
Phil Holmes <=