Is the test.winehq.org front page too pessimistic?
shacklein at gmail.com
Wed Feb 11 18:35:41 CST 2009
2009/2/12 James Hawkins <truiken at gmail.com>:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard at winehq.org> wrote:
>> James Hawkins <truiken at gmail.com> writes:
>>> We should leave the failing files percentage up (note the name change)
>>> and add a failing tests percentage next to it. The failing tests
>>> percentage should be total_test_failures / total_tests_run.
>> That's not a useful number, many files run a lot of tests, of which a
>> huge majority always succeeds. Having a single failure among 10,000
>> tests means that the test failed, and it's something bad that should be
>> taken care of. Showing that as a 99.99% success would be very misleading.
> Ok you're right. I wasn't thinking on that scale. I assumed we had
> more than 0.01% failures.
Just goes to show we're not in the advertising/marketing industry!
Facts are good, useful data is good, fudging the figures to make
ourselves look good is bad :)
More information about the wine-devel