On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 7:42 PM, Dan Kegel dank@kegel.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Vijay Kiran Kamuju infyquest@gmail.com wrote:
When running tests for the patch, I think we should just run the tests of the dlls that are affected direct;y or indirectly by that change. its running the tests for entire wine, which is very time consuming.
True, but hey, it was easier to code. And getting anything like this working at all is pretty hard. Figuring out which tests a give patch affects is an extra challenge I'd rather not face just now. Once it's up and working well we can refine it.
Ok I was expressing my concern as it took around 2-3hrs to see my patch in the patchwatcher. Also as you you running the wine tests all for each patch are you cleaning the .wine directory ( I am bit confused here)
What will happen if we have patch barrage, like once when alexander comes from vacation.
It'll fall behind some. If need be, I can run it on a really fast machine.
It would better if we have a parallelized version of the tests also run on a fast m/c. Also can you improve the messages. If there are errors, Its possible to only show the test data that failed rather than the complete test run. Also put it in a public repository with you as sole commiter. So If we have any suggestions/improvements, can mail you with the changes (We will not flood ur mail box ;) )
---- VJ
- dan