Re: build test farm [was Re: [Chicken-users] Cmake broken again: paths are not quoted]

[Bill Hoffman]

We should be able to setup a chicken dashboard at Kitware.  
But only the server end.   You will need clients to run the tests
and populate the dashboard.  We have a public dashboard that you can
try this on.  If you enable dashboards in the cmake files of chicken
the default server is the kitware public dashboard.

Here is the link:
http://public.kitware.com/Public/Dashboard/20060721-0100-Nightly/Dashboard.html
Here is a link to other dashboards at kitware:

http://public.kitware.com/dashboard.php

Why don't you try a few submissions and see if it is what you want, and
then we can set up a chicken specific dashboard.

To get things going:
http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_Testing_With_CTest

Basically:

ENABLE_TESTING()
INCLUDE(Dart)

Then make Experimental should send an experimental submission to the
public dashboard.


-Bill


At 07:21 PM 7/20/2006, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
>Toby Butzon wrote: 
>>
>>On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 04:00:48PM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
>>  
>>>
>>>Sourceforge.net does provide a "compile farm" that provides the ability
>>>to build on multiple platforms, though Felix would have to move Chicken
>>>there to take advantage of it.  It doesn't do Windows, though.
>>>    
>>
>>
>>Hmm... maybe it would be possible to construct our own, with volunteered
>>resources. The normal process would be to pull from darcs, try the build,
>>and post apparent success or failure (maybe to a page on the swiki?). If
>>it fails, a log could be posted, too. (A similar alternate process would
>>exist for checking release tarballs, but this would run only when a new
>>tarball has been released, so as not to waste cycles rebuilding something
>>that's already been tested.) I would envision this being a chicken
>>script ("compilefarm.egg"?) and it'd be triggered by cron/task
>>scheduler, on the volunteer's terms (so volunteers are in full control
>>of how much it encroaches upon their system).
>>  
>
>I think it's worth asking William Hoffman of Kitware whether they can provide 
>CMake + CTest + Dashboard testing resources.  If they don't provide the 
>testing machines themselves, I'm sure they can at least give us pointers on 
>how to set up such a thing, and what the consequences / impacts are.  I do not 
>believe CMake currently supports Darcs, that's an issue.  But perhaps we can 
>scare someone up to deal with that issue, for CMake's benefit.
>
>>
>>
>>I don't think the program to do it would be all that complicated; the
>>question is, could we find volunteers to give up some cpu cycles on
>>various platforms? (I for one have at least a Windows box and a Linux
>>2.6 box I leave always running that would be offered.)
>>  
>
>It would be worth knowing if the Dashboard can function in a distributed or 
>peer-to-peer manner.
>
>>
>>
>>The product would be a page with a table on it, showing each volunteered
>>machine, architecture and OS, build schedule, when the last build ran, and
>>success/failure. (And, if failure, a link to the log of what happened.)
>>  
>
>I feel that this sort of reportage reinvents the Dashboard, and thus is a 
>waste of open source development resources.  Unless someone out there is such 
>a Chicken web guru that they deliver proof-of-concept in a few days work.
>
>>
>>
>>Maybe this would also provide some more incentive for a test suite, and
>>at a minimum, we could start with one for (use srfi-1) and whatever other
>>problems might be diagnosed after "successfully" building.
>>
>>I'd like to hear what others think about this.
>>  
>
>I think test suites need no additional motive.  Even without a nightly build, 
>test suites are quite valuable to development.  Bigloo has an excellent test 
>suite, for instance.  The question is, will someone do the work of providing 
>and integrating a test suite.
>
>
>Cheers,
>Brandon Van Every
>