Enhancing winetest infrastructure [WAS: Wineconf agenda]

Paul Millar paul at astro.gla.ac.uk
Thu Mar 17 07:56:02 CST 2005

On Thursday 17 March 2005 11:54, Jakob Eriksson wrote:
> Maybe one could script something up so that a commit to
> tests CVS would not be *possible* without a confirmed test
> pass on Windows 95, NT, 2000 and XP.
> That'd be the best thing since sliced bread.

CVS supports doing some server-side validation tests before accepting 
a commit, so it could be done; but I don't think this would be 
"nice".  CVS is a mechanism for sharing code: its not really a 
testing framework.

There would be potential issues with CVS locking, timeouts (e.g. what 
happens if the XP machine dies?), but the real issue is it would just 
gets in the way of developers by making the CVS server fragile.

For the testing framework, I'd say what we have just now is fine.  It 
lives outside (and on top of) CVS.  Having broken tests is OK, 
provided they're fixed within a suitable time-scale [*].

(just my 2c-worth again)



[*] -- Of course, what is the "suitable time-scale"? who's willing to 
make sure things get fixed?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/attachments/20050317/ac645c59/attachment.pgp

More information about the wine-devel mailing list