The problem with the current arrangement is that when machines pop in and out, any failures that are more likely on those machines also pop in and out, so error counts fluctuate, which obscures the smaller changes due to wine fixes or regressions. I like the current output, and don't want to change it; I just want to add another view for people who want to judge progress.
Setting up a view with a fixed set of machines would do, too. Which is easier?
On Apr 9, 2009 12:12 PM, "Alexandre Julliard" julliard@winehq.org wrote:
Dan Kegel dank@kegel.com writes: > On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Alexandre Julliard <julliard@... I don't see the point. If you want statistics for a specific machine, sure, we could generate a page for that. But the global index should show all the results we have. If it shows too many failures it means the tests are not robust enough across machines and should be fixed, not ignored.
--
Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org
On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Dan Kegel dank@kegel.com wrote:
The problem with the current arrangement is that when machines pop in and out, any failures that are more likely on those machines also pop in and out, so error counts fluctuate, which obscures the smaller changes due to wine fixes or regressions. I like the current output, and don't want to change it; I just want to add another view for people who want to judge progress.
Setting up a view with a fixed set of machines would do, too. Which is easier?
FWIW, Paul's windows machines and my test results for Wine (32 bit and 64 bit) should be pretty stable. You'd probably want to remove the BSD/Solaris runs though.
-
Austin English -
Dan Kegel